Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,866

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

TIMI Frame Count: A Quantitative Method of Assessing Coronary Artery Flow

Gibson, C. Michael, Cannon, Christopher P., Daley, William L., Dodge, J. Theodore, Alexander, Barbara, Marble, Susan J., McCabe, Carolyn H., Raymond, Lori, Fortin, Terry, Poole, W. Kenneth, Braunwald, Eugene·1996·Circulation

Abstract

Background Although the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) flow grade is a valuable and widely used qualitative measure in angiographic trials, it is limited by its subjective and categorical nature. Methods and Results In normal patients and patients with acute myocardial infarction (MI) (TIMI 4), the number of cineframes needed for dye to reach standardized distal landmarks was counted to objectively assess an index of coronary blood flow as a continuous variable. The TIMI frame-counting method was reproducible (mean absolute difference between two injections, 4.7±3.9 frames, n=85). In 78 consecutive normal arteries, the left anterior descending coronary artery (LAD) TIMI frame count (36.2±2.6 frames) was 1.7 times longer than the mean of the right coronary artery (20.4±3.0) and circumflex counts (22.2±4.1, P <.001 for either versus LAD). Therefore, the longer LAD frame counts were corrected by dividing by 1.7 to derive the corrected TIMI frame count (CTFC). The mean CTFC in culprit arteries 90 minutes after thrombolytic administration followed a continuous unimodal distribution (there were not subpopulations of slow and fast flow) with a mean value of 39.2±20.0 frames, which improved to 31.7±12.9 frames by 18 to 36 hours ( P <.001). No correlation existed between improvements in CTFCs and changes in minimum lumen diameter ( r =−.05, P =.59). The mean 90-minute CTFC among nonculprit arteries (25.5±9.8) was significantly higher (flow was slower) compared with arteries with normal flow in the absence of acute MI (21.0±3.1, P <.001) but improved to that of normal arteries by 1 day after thrombolysis (21.7±7.1, P =NS). Conclusions The CTFC is a simple, reproducible, objective, and quantitative index of coronary flow that allows standardization of TIMI flow grades and facilitates comparisons of angiographic end points between trials. Disordered resistance vessel function may account in part for reductions in flow in the early hours after thrombolysis.

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.93.5.879

Cites

1 of 1 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 1 references

Cited by

See all 1,866

Metadata

Authors
Gibson, C. M., Cannon, C. P., Daley, W. L., Dodge, J. T., Alexander, B., Marble, S. J., McCabe, C. H., Raymond, L., Fortin, T., Poole, W. K., & Braunwald, E.
Venue
Circulation
Published
1996-03
Volume
93
Issue
5
Pages
879-888
ISSN
  • 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4539
OpenAlex
W2037709494
Cited by
1,866
References
1
FWCI
20.24
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: TIMI Frame Count: A Quantitative Method of Assessing Coronary Artery Flow. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/01.cir.93.5.879
The paper
Gibson, C. M., Cannon, C. P., Daley, W. L., Dodge, J. T., Alexander, B., Marble, S. J., McCabe, C. H., Raymond, L., Fortin, T., Poole, W. K., & Braunwald, E. (1996). TIMI Frame Count: A Quantitative Method of Assessing Coronary Artery Flow. Circulation. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.cir.93.5.879

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.