Key result
The study proposed to assess trends in racial and sex disparities in FFR-guided PCI utilization between 2010 and 2014, but the abstract reports no quantitative results.
Why the study?
Are there sex and racial disparities in the utilization of fractional flow reserve-guided percutaneous coronary intervention?
Observational
Yes
Are there sex and racial disparities in the utilization of fractional flow reserve-guided percutaneous coronary intervention?
No quantitative disparity results reported; leaves open whether sex or racial differences exist in FFR-guided PCI utilization.
FAME (Fractional Flow Reserve versus Angiography for Multivessel Evaluation) and FAME-2 trials have demonstrated the improved outcomes with fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guided percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) and established the essential role of FFR to reduce major cardiovascular events (1,2). However, FFR adoption is not up to the mark in many centers and the data are almost non-existent regarding racial and sex disparities in FFR-guided PCI utilization. Therefore, we proposed to assess the trends of racial and sex disparities in FFR-guided PCI utilization over the 5-year period between 2010 and 2014.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Desai et al. (2018) conducted an observational in Percutaneous coronary intervention. Fractional flow reserve-guided percutaneous coronary intervention was evaluated on Trends of racial and sex disparities in FFR-guided PCI utilization. The study proposed to assess trends in racial and sex disparities in FFR-guided PCI utilization between 2010 and 2014, but the abstract reports no quantitative results.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: