The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Fractional Flow Reserve to Determine the Appropriateness of Angioplasty in Moderate Coronary Stenosis: A Randomized Trial
Open accessAbstract
Background —PTCA of a coronary stenosis without documented ischemia at noninvasive stress testing is often performed, but its benefit is unproven. Coronary pressure–derived fractional flow reserve (FFR) is an invasive index of stenosis severity that is a reliable substitute for noninvasive stress testing. A value of 0.75 identifies stenoses with hemodynamic significance. Methods and Results —In 325 patients for whom PTCA was planned and who did not have documented ischemia, FFR of the stenosis was measured. If FFR was >0.75, patients were randomly assigned to deferral (deferral group; n=91) or performance (performance group; n=90) of PTCA. If FFR was <0.75, PTCA was performed as planned (reference group; n=144). Clinical follow-up was obtained at 1, 3, 6, 12, and 24 months. Event-free survival was similar between the deferral and performance groups (92% versus 89% at 12 months and 89% versus 83% at 24 months) but was significantly lower in the reference group (80% at 12 months and 78% at 24 months). In addition, the percentage of patients free from angina was similar between the deferral and performance groups (49% versus 50% at 12 months and 70% versus 51% at 24 months) but was significantly higher in the reference group (67% at 12 and 80% at 24 months). Conclusions —In patients with a coronary stenosis without evidence of ischemia, coronary pressure–derived FFR identifies those who will benefit from PTCA.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cited by
2018 ESC/EACTS guidelines on myocardial revascularization
Neumann, F.-J., Sousa-Uva, M., Ahlsson, A., Alfonso, F., Banning, A. P., Benedetto, U., Byrne, R. A., Collet, J.-P., Falk, V., Head, S. J., et al. (2019) · European Heart Journal · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehy394 · Cited by 7,167
Self-citationFractional Flow Reserve–Guided PCI versus Medical Therapy in Stable Coronary Disease
De Bruyne, B., Pijls, N. H. J., Kalesan, B., Barbato, E., Tonino, P. A. L., Piroth, Z., Jagic, N., Möbius-Winkler, S., Rioufol, G., Witt, N., et al. (2012) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1205361 · Cited by 2,772
Self-citation2018 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization
Neumann, F.-J., Sousa-Uva, M., Ahlsson, A., Alfonso, F., Banning, A. P., Benedetto, U., Byrne, R. A., Collet, J.-P., Falk, V., Head, S. J., et al. (2019) · EuroIntervention · doi:10.4244/eijy19m01_01 · Cited by 1,259
Fihn, S. D., Blankenship, J. C., Alexander, K. P., Bittl, J. A., Byrne, J. G., Fletcher, B. J., Fonarow, G. C., Lange, R. A., Levine, G. N., Maddox, T. M., et al. (2014) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/cir.0000000000000095 · Cited by 1,029
When should decision-analytic modeling be used in the economic evaluation of health care?
Siebert, U. (2003) · The European Journal of Health Economics · doi:10.1007/s10198-003-0205-2 · Cited by 181
Metadata
- Authors
- Bech, G. J. W., De Bruyne, B., Pijls, N. H. J., de Muinck, E. D., Hoorntje, J. C. A., Escaned, J., Stella, P. R., Boersma, E., Bartunek, J., Koolen, J. J., & Wijns, W.
- Venue
- Circulation
- Published
- 2001-06-19
- Volume
- 103
- Issue
- 24
- Pages
- 2928-2934
- ISSN
- 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
- 1524-4539
- OpenAlex
- W1619893722
- Cited by
- 911
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 17.39
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: Fractional Flow Reserve to Determine the Appropriateness of Angioplasty in Moderate Coronary Stenosis: A Randomized Trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/01.cir.103.24.2928
- The paper
- Bech, G. J. W., De Bruyne, B., Pijls, N. H. J., de Muinck, E. D., Hoorntje, J. C. A., Escaned, J., Stella, P. R., Boersma, E., Bartunek, J., Koolen, J. J., & Wijns, W. (2001). Fractional Flow Reserve to Determine the Appropriateness of Angioplasty in Moderate Coronary Stenosis: A Randomized Trial. Circulation. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.cir.103.24.2928
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.