Why the study?
Does a derived equation using multiple pressure measurements more accurately predict true FFR of individual sequential stenoses compared to apparent FFR in a canine model?
Does a derived equation using multiple pressure measurements more accurately predict true FFR of individual sequential stenoses compared to apparent FFR in a canine model?
In sequential coronary stenoses, FFR of each lesion cannot be accurately calculated using the standard isolated stenosis equation but can be predicted using a more complete equation incorporating multiple pressure measurements.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Should not yet alter FFR use in sequential stenoses; leaves open human validation of multi-pressure equation.
Bruyne et al. (2000) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: