Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 995

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Expert consensus and evidence-based recommendations for the assessment of flow-mediated dilation in humans

Thijssen, Dick H J, Bruno, Rosa Maria, van Mil, Anke C C M, Holder, Sophie M, Faita, Francesco, Greyling, Arno, Zock, Peter L, Taddei, Stefano, Deanfield, John E, Luscher, Thomas, Green, Daniel J, Ghiadoni, Lorenzo·2019·European Heart Journal

Abstract

Endothelial dysfunction is involved in the development of atherosclerosis, which precedes asymptomatic structural vascular alterations as well as clinical manifestations of cardiovascular disease (CVD). Endothelial function can be assessed non-invasively using the flow-mediated dilation (FMD) technique. Flow-mediated dilation represents an endothelium-dependent, largely nitric oxide (NO)-mediated dilatation of conduit arteries in response to an imposed increase in blood flow and shear stress. Flow-mediated dilation is affected by cardiovascular (CV) risk factors, relates to coronary artery endothelial function, and independently predicts CVD outcome. Accordingly, FMD is a tool for examining the pathophysiology of CVD and possibly identifying subjects at increased risk for future CV events. Moreover, it has merit in examining the acute and long-term impact of physiological and pharmacological interventions in humans. Despite concerns about its reproducibility, the available evidence shows that highly reliable FMD measurements can be achieved when specialized laboratories follow standardized protocols. For this purpose, updated expert consensus guidelines for the performance of FMD are presented, which are based on critical appraisal of novel technical approaches, development of analysis software, and studies exploring the physiological principles underlying the technique. Uniformity in FMD performance will (i) improve comparability between studies, (ii) contribute to construction of reference values, and (iii) offer an easy accessible and early marker of atherosclerosis that could complement clinical symptoms of structural arterial disease and facilitate early diagnosis and prediction of CVD outcomes.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/eurheartj/ehz350

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 6 references

Cited by

See all 995

Metadata

Authors
Thijssen, D. H. J., Bruno, R. M., van Mil, A. C. C. M., Holder, S. M., Faita, F., Greyling, A., Zock, P. L., Taddei, S., Deanfield, J. E., Luscher, T., Green, D. J., & Ghiadoni, L.
Venue
European Heart Journal
Published
2019-06-18
Volume
40
Issue
30
Pages
2534-2547
ISSN
  • 0195-668X (ISSN-L)
  • 1522-9645
OpenAlex
W2952389410
Cited by
995
References
6
FWCI
63.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Expert consensus and evidence-based recommendations for the assessment of flow-mediated dilation in humans. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/eurheartj/ehz350
The paper
Thijssen, D. H. J., Bruno, R. M., van Mil, A. C. C. M., Holder, S. M., Faita, F., Greyling, A., Zock, P. L., Taddei, S., Deanfield, J. E., Luscher, T., Green, D. J., & Ghiadoni, L. (2019). Expert consensus and evidence-based recommendations for the assessment of flow-mediated dilation in humans. European Heart Journal. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehz350

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.