Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 266

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Pressure-Derived Fractional Flow Reserve to Assess Serial Epicardial Stenoses: Theoretical Basis and Animal Validation

De Bruyne, Bernard, Pijls, Nico H. J., Heyndrickx, Guy R., Hodeige, Dominique, Kirkeeide, Richard, Gould, K. Lance·2000·Circulation

Abstract

Background —Fractional flow reserve (FFR) is an index of stenosis severity validated for isolated stenoses. This study develops the theoretical basis and experimentally validates equations for predicting FFR of sequential stenoses separately. Methods and Results —For 2 stenoses in series, equations were derived to predict FFR (FFR pred ) of each stenosis separately (ie, as if the other one were removed) from arterial pressure (P a ), pressure between the 2 stenoses (P m ), distal coronary pressure (P d ), and coronary occlusive pressure (P w ). In 5 dogs with 2 stenoses of varying severity in the left circumflex coronary artery, FFR pred was compared with FFR app (ratio of the pressure just distal to that just proximal to each stenoses) and to FFR true (ratio of the pressures distal to proximal to each stenosis but after removal of the other one) in case of fixed distal and varying proximal stenoses (n=15) and in case of fixed proximal and varying distal stenoses (n=20). The overestimation of FFR true by FFR app was larger than that of FFR true by FFR pred (0.070±0.007 versus 0.029±0.004, P <0.01 for fixed distal stenoses, and 0.114±0.01 versus 0.036±0.004, P <0.01 for fixed proximal stenoses). This overestimation of FFR true by FFR app was larger for fixed proximal than for fixed distal stenoses. Conclusions —The interaction between 2 stenoses is such that FFR of each lesion separately cannot be calculated by the equation for isolated stenoses (P d /P a during hyperemia) applied to each separately but can be predicted by more complete equations taking into account P a , P m , P d , and P w .

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 · 10.1161/01.cir.101.15.1840

Cites

5 of 5 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 5 references

Metadata

Authors
De Bruyne, B., Pijls, N. H. J., Heyndrickx, G. R., Hodeige, D., Kirkeeide, R., & Gould, K. L.
Venue
Circulation
Published
2000-04-18
Volume
101
Issue
15
Pages
1840-1847
ISSN
  • 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4539
OpenAlex
W2172178391
Cited by
266
References
5
FWCI
6.15
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: Pressure-Derived Fractional Flow Reserve to Assess Serial Epicardial Stenoses: Theoretical Basis and Animal Validation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/01.cir.101.15.1840
The paper
De Bruyne, B., Pijls, N. H. J., Heyndrickx, G. R., Hodeige, D., Kirkeeide, R., & Gould, K. L. (2000). Pressure-Derived Fractional Flow Reserve to Assess Serial Epicardial Stenoses: Theoretical Basis and Animal Validation. Circulation. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.cir.101.15.1840

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.