A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Prospective Evaluation of the Impact of Side-Holes and Guide-Catheter Disengagement From the Coronary Ostium on Fractional Flow Reserve Measurements. | LitMetric

Background: We prospectively examined the impact of side-holes and guide-catheter disengagement on fractional flow reserve (FFR) measurements.

Methods: Twenty-five patients undergoing clinically indicated FFR measurement for intermediate coronary artery stenosis were enrolled. Four FFR measurements were made in random order during intravenous adenosine infusion with: (a) an engaged side-hole guide catheter; (b) a disengaged side-hole guide catheter; (c) an engaged non-side-hole guide catheter; and (d) disengaged non-side-hole guide catheter.

Results: Mean patient age was 65 ± 9 years and 100% were men. The mean distal poststenotic pressure/proximal aortic pressure (Pd/Pa) at baseline was 0.93 ± 0.05 mm Hg. Using intravenous adenosine infusion, the mean FFR measured with engaged vs disengaged non-side-hole guide catheters was 0.87 ± 0.09 vs 0.83 ± 0.10, respectively (mean difference, 0.039 ± 0.04; P<.001). The mean FFR with engaged vs disengaged side-hole guide catheters was 0.85 ± 0.10 vs 0.83 ± 0.10 (mean difference, 0.020 ± 0.02; P<.001). The mean difference in FFR measurements was 0.024 ± 0.03 (P<.001) among engaged guide catheters and 0.005 ± 0.03 (P=.47) among disengaged guide catheters.

Conclusions: When FFR measurements are performed with engaged guide catheters, side-hole catheters provide lower measurements. When FFR measurements are obtained with disengaged guide catheters, they are even lower and similar between guide catheter types.

Download full-text PDF

Source

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

guide catheter
12
non-side-hole guide
12
impact side-holes
8
side-holes guide-catheter
8
guide-catheter disengagement
8
fractional flow
8
flow reserve
8
intravenous adenosine
8
adenosine infusion
8
side-hole guide
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!