Percent stenosis in CAD - A flaw in current practice

Nature Reviews Cardiology

Volumn 7, Issue 9, 2010, Pages 482-484

  Gould, K Lance ^a   Johnson, Nils P ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANTILIPEMIC AGENT;

ADVERSE OUTCOME; ANGIOCARDIOGRAPHY; CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; CLINICAL TRIAL; CORONARY ARTERY ATHEROSCLEROSIS; CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; CORONARY ARTERY OBSTRUCTION; CORONARY ARTERY RECANALIZATION; DISEASE SEVERITY; EARLY DIAGNOSIS; ENDOTHELIAL DYSFUNCTION; FOLLOW UP; FRACTIONAL FLOW RESERVE; HEART CATHETERIZATION; HEART MUSCLE ISCHEMIA; HEART MUSCLE PERFUSION; HUMAN; MEDICAL PRACTICE; MORTALITY; PATIENT CARE; PERCUTANEOUS CORONARY INTERVENTION; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SHORT SURVEY; TREATMENT FAILURE; TREATMENT RESPONSE; ANGIOGRAPHY; ARTICLE; BLOOD FLOW VELOCITY; HEALTH SURVEY; HEART MUSCLE REPERFUSION; HOSPITALIZATION; METHODOLOGY; PATHOLOGY; PROGNOSIS;

ANGIOGRAPHY; BLOOD FLOW VELOCITY; CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; CORONARY STENOSIS; HEALTH STATUS INDICATORS; HUMANS; MYOCARDIAL REPERFUSION; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PROGNOSIS; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX;

EID: 77956031422     PISSN: 17595002     EISSN: 17595010     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/nrcardio.2010.119     Document Type: Short Survey

References (10)

1. Pijls, n. H. et al. for the FAMe study investigators. Fractional flow reserve versus angiography for guiding percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease: 2-year follow-up of the FAMe (Fractional Flow Reserve versus Angiography for Multivessel evaluation) study. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 56, 177-184 (2010).
2. Tonino, P. A. et al. for the FAMe study investigators. Fractional flow reserve versus angiography for guiding percutaneous coronary intervention. N. Engl. J. Med. 360, 213-224 (2009).
3. Boden, w. e. et al. for the COURAGe Trial Research Group. Optimal medical therapy with or without PCi for stable coronary disease. N. Engl. J. Med. 356, 1503-1516 (2007).
4. Gould, K. L. Does coronary flow trump coronary anatomy? JACC Cardiovasc. Imaging 2, 1009-1023 (2009).
5. white, C. W. et al. Does visual interpretation of the coronary arteriogram predict the physiologic importance of a coronary stenosis? N. Engl. J. Med. 310, 819-824 (1984).
6. Topol, e. J. & nissen, s. e. Our preoccupation with coronary luminology. The dissociation between clinical and angiographic findings in ischemic heart disease. Circulation 92, 2333-2342 (1995).
7. Meijboom, w. B. et al. Comprehensive assessment of coronary artery stenoses: computed tomography coronary angiography versus conventional coronary angiography and correlation with fractional flow reserve in patients with stable angina. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 52, 636-643 (2008).
8. Tonino, P. A. et al. Angiographic versus functional severity of coronary artery stenoses in the FAMe study: fractional flow reserve versus angiography in multivessel evaluation. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 55, 2816-2821 (2010).
9. Lin, G. A., Dudley, R. A. & Redberg, R. F. Cardiologists' use of percutaneous coronary interventions for stable coronary artery disease. Arch. Intern. Med. 167, 1604-1609 (2007).
10. sdringola, s. et al. Combined intense lifestyle and pharmacologic lipid treatment further reduce coronary events and myocardial perfusion abnormalities compared with usual-care cholesterol-lowering drugs in coronary artery disease. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 41, 263-272 (2003).