a systematic review and meta‐analysis. BMC Cardiovasc Disord 2016; 16:1–9. doi:10.1186/s12872‐016‐0355‐7
31 31 Rimac G, Fearon WF, De Bruyne B, et al. Clinical value of post‐percutaneous coronary intervention fractional flow reserve value: A systematic review and meta‐analysis. Amer Heart Jnl 2017; 183:1–9. doi:10.1016/j.ahj.2016.10.005
32 32 Lee JM, Hwang D, Choi KH, et al. Prognostic Implications of Relative Increase and Final Fractional Flow Reserve in Patients With Stent Implantation. JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions 2018; 11:2099–109. doi:10.1016/j.jcin.2018.07.031
33 33 Piroth Z, Toth GG, Tonino PAL, et al. Prognostic Value of Fractional Flow Reserve Measured Immediately After Drug‐Eluting Stent Implantation. Circulation Cardiovascular Interventions 2017; 10:346. doi:10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.116.005233
34 34 Ito T, Tani T, Fujita H, et al. Relationship between fractional flow reserve and residual plaque volume and clinical outcomes after optimal drug‐eluting stent implantation: Insight from intravascular ultrasound volumetric analysis. Int Jnl Cardiology 2014; 176:399–404. doi:10.1016/j.ijcard.2014.07.115
35 35 Rieber J, Schiele TM, Erdin P, et al. Fractional flow reserve predicts major adverse cardiac events after coronary stent implantation. Z Kardiol 2002; 91 Suppl 3:132–6.
36 36 Baranauskas A, Peace A, Kibarskis A, et al. FFR result post PCI is suboptimal in long diffuse coronary artery disease. EuroIntervention 2016; 12:1473–80. doi:10.4244/EIJ‐D‐15‐00514
37 37 Kim H‐L, Koo B‐K, Nam C‐W, et al. Clinical and Physiological Outcomes of Fractional Flow Reserve‐Guided Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With Serial Stenoses Within One Coronary Artery. JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions 2012; 5:1013–8. doi:10.1016/j.jcin.2012.06.017
38 38 Azzalini L, Poletti E, Demir OM, et al. Impact of Post‐Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Fractional Flow Reserve Measurement on Procedural Management and Clinical Outcomes: The REPEAT‐FFR Study. The Journal of Invasive Cardiology 2019; 31:229–34.
39 39 Matsumura M, Johnson NP, Fearon WF, et al. Accuracy of Fractional Flow Reserve Measurements in Clinical Practice: Observations From a Core Laboratory Analysis. JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions 2017; 10:1392–401. doi:10.1016/j.jcin.2017.03.031
40 40 Matsumura M, Maehara A, Davies JE, et al. Intensive Training and Real‐Time Quality Control by a Physiology Core Laboratory. Circulation Cardiovascular Interventions 2020; 13:1–3. doi:10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.120.009077
41 41 Flattery E, Rahim HM, Petrossian G, et al. Competency‐Based Assessment of Interventional Cardiology Fellows’ Abilities in Intracoronary Physiology and Imaging. Circulation Cardiovascular Interventions 2020; 13:1360–3. doi:10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.119.008760
42 42 Curzen N, Rana O, Nicholas Z, et al. Does Routine Pressure Wire Assessment Influence Management Strategy at Coronary Angiography for Diagnosis of Chest Pain?: The RIPCORD Study. Circulation Cardiovascular Interventions 2014; 7:248–55. doi:10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.113.000978
43 43 Nijjer SS, Sen S, Petraco R, et al. The Instantaneous wave‐Free Ratio (iFR) pullback: a novel innovation using baseline physiology to optimise coronary angioplasty in tandem lesions. Cardiovascular Revascularization Medicine: Including Molecular Interventions 2015; 16:167–71. doi:10.1016/j.carrev.2015.01.006
44 44 Nijjer SS, de Waard GA, Sen S, et al. Coronary pressure and flow relationships in humans: phasic analysis of normal and pathological vessels and the implications for stenosis assessment: a report from the Iberian‐Dutch‐English (IDEAL) collaborators. Euro Heart J. 2016; 37:2069–80. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehv626
45 45 Nijjer SS, Petraco R, van de Hoef TP, et al. Change in coronary blood flow after percutaneous coronary intervention in relation to baseline lesion physiology: results of the JUSTIFY‐PCI study. Circulation Cardiovascular Interventions 2015; 8:e001715. doi:10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.114.001715
46 46 Tarkin JM, Nijjer S, Sen S, et al. Hemodynamic response to intravenous adenosine and its effect on fractional flow reserve assessment: results of the Adenosine for the Functional Evaluation of Coronary Stenosis Severity (AFFECTS) study. Circulation Cardiovascular Interventions 2013; 6:654–61. doi:10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.113.000591
47 47 Echavarría‐Pinto M, Petraco R, van de Hoef TP, et al. Fractional flow reserve and minimum Pd/Pa ratio during intravenous adenosine infusion: very similar but not always the same. EuroIntervention: Journal of EuroPCR in Collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology Published Online First: 22 October 2014. doi:10.4244/EIJY14M10_09
48 48 Echavarria Pinto M, Gonzalo N, Ibanez B, et al. Low Coronary Microcirculatory Resistance Associated With Profound Hypotension During Intravenous Adenosine Infusion: Implications for the Functional Assessment of Coronary Stenoses. Circulation Cardiovascular Interventions 2014; 7:35–42. doi:10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.113.000659
49 49 Nijjer SS, Sen S, Petraco R, et al. Improvement in coronary haemodynamics after percutaneous coronary intervention: assessment using instantaneous wave‐free ratio. Heart (British Cardiac Society) 2013; 99:1740–8. doi:10.1136/heartjnl‐2013‐304387
50 50 Pijls NH, van Son JA, Kirkeeide RL, et al. Experimental basis of determining maximum coronary, myocardial, and collateral blood flow by pressure measurements for assessing functional stenosis severity before and after percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. Circulation 1993; 87:1354–67. doi:10.1161/01.CIR.87.4.1354
51 51 Johnson NP, Johnson DT, Kirkeeide RL, et al. Repeatability of Fractional Flow Reserve Despite Variations in Systemic and Coronary Hemodynamics. JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions 2015; 8:1018–27. doi:10.1016/j.jcin.2015.01.039
52 52 Perera D, Biggart S, Postema P, et al. Right atrial pressure: Can it be ignored when calculating fractional flow reserve and collateral flow index? J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004; 44:2089–91. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2004.08.018
53 53 Van Belle EV, Rioufol G, Pouillot C, et al. Outcome Impact of Coronary Revascularization Strategy Reclassification With Fractional Flow Reserve at Time of Diagnostic Angiography Insights From a Large French Multicenter Fractional Flow Reserve Registry. Circulation 2014; 129:173–85. doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.113.006646
54 54 Smits PC, Boxma‐de Klerk BM. Fractional Flow Reserve‐Guided Multivessel Angioplasty in Myocardial Infarction. N Engl J Med. 2017; 377:397–8. doi:10.1056/NEJMc1706275
55 55 Engstrøm T, Kelbaek H, Helqvist S, et al. Complete revascularisation versus treatment of the culprit lesion only in patients with ST‐segment elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease (DANAMI‐3—PRIMULTI): an open‐label, randomised controlled trial. The Lancet (London, England) 2015; 386:665–71. doi:10.1016/S0140‐6736(15)60648‐1
56 56 Atti V, Gwon Y, Narayanan MA, et al. Multivessel Versus Culprit‐Only Revascularization in STEMI and Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease. JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions 2020; 13:1571–82. doi:10.1016/j.jcin.2020.04.055
57 57 Thim T, van der Hoeven NW, Musto C, et al. Evaluation and Management of Nonculprit Lesions in STEMI. JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions 2020; 13:1145–54. doi:10.1016/j.jcin.2020.02.030
58 58 Layland J, Oldroyd KG, Curzen N, et al. Fractional flow reserve vs. angiography in guiding management to optimize outcomes in non‐ST‐segment elevation myocardial infarction: the British Heart Foundation FAMOUS–NSTEMI randomized trial. Euro Heart J. 2014; ehu338. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehu338
59 59 De Maria GL, Garcia‐Garcia HM, Scarsini R, et al. Novel Indices of Coronary Physiology. Circulation Cardiovascular Interventions 2020; 13:1596–13. doi:10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.119.008487
60 60 Gabara L, Hinton J, Gunn J, et al. Coronary Physiology Derived from Invasive Angiography: Will it be a Game Changer? Interventional Cardiology Review 2020; 15:1–8. doi:10.15420/icr.2019.25
61 61 Nijjer SS, de Waard GA, Sen S, et al. Coronary pressure and flow relationships in humans: phasic analysis of normal and pathological vessels and the implications for stenosis assessment: a report from the Iberian–Dutch–English (IDEAL) collaborators. Euro Heart J. 2016; 37:2069–80.