Thirty-Month Outcome After Fractional Flow Reserve–Guided Versus Conventional Multivessel Percutaneous Coronary Intervention
- 1 October 2005
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Elsevier in The American Journal of Cardiology
- Vol. 96 (7) , 877-884
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2005.05.040
Abstract
No abstract availableKeywords
This publication has 18 references indexed in Scilit:
- Use of fractional flow reserve versus stress perfusion scintigraphy after unstable anginaJournal of the American College of Cardiology, 2003
- Coronary Pressure Measurement After Stenting Predicts Adverse Events at Follow-UpCirculation, 2002
- Usefulness of fractional flow reserve for risk stratification of patients with multivessel coronary artery disease and an intermediate stenosisThe American Journal of Cardiology, 2002
- Fractional Flow Reserve to Determine the Appropriateness of Angioplasty in Moderate Coronary StenosisCirculation, 2001
- Angiographical and Doppler flow-derived parameters for assessment of coronary lesion severity and its relation to the result of exercise electrocardiographyEuropean Heart Journal, 2000
- Practice and potential pitfalls of coronary pressure measurementCatheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions, 2000
- Measurement of Fractional Flow Reserve to Assess the Functional Severity of Coronary-Artery StenosesNew England Journal of Medicine, 1996
- Our Preoccupation With Coronary LuminologyCirculation, 1995
- Visual estimates of percent diameter coronary stenosis: “A battered gold standard”Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 1988
- Does Visual Interpretation of the Coronary Arteriogram Predict the Physiologic Importance of a Coronary Stenosis?New England Journal of Medicine, 1984