Reserve Registry. Circulation 2014; 129:173–85. doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.113.00664654 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. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehv626
62 62 Sen S, Asrress KN, Nijjer S, et al. Diagnostic classification of the instantaneous wave‐free ratio is equivalent to fractional flow reserve and is not improved with adenosine administration. Results of CLARIFY (Classification Accuracy of Pressure‐Only Ratios Against Indices Using Flow Study). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013; 61:1409–20. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2013.01.034
63 63 Sen S, Escaned J, Malik IS, et al. Development and Validation of a New Adenosine‐Independent Index of Stenosis Severity From Coronary Wave–Intensity Analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011; 59:1–12. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2011.11.003
64 64 Petraco R, Escaned J, Sen S, et al. Classification performance of instantaneous wave‐free ratio (iFR) and fractional flow reserve in a clinical population of intermediate coronary stenoses: results of the ADVISE registry. EuroIntervention 2013; 9:91–101. doi:10.4244/EIJV9I1A14
65 65 Petraco R, Al‐Lamee R, Gotberg M, et al. Real‐time use of instantaneous wave‐free ratio: results of the ADVISE in‐practice: an international, multicenter evaluation of instantaneous wave‐free ratio in clinical practice. Amer Heart Jnl 2014; 168:739–48. doi:10.1016/j.ahj.2014.06.022
66 66 Escaned J, Echavarría‐Pinto M, Garcia‐Garcia HM, et al. Prospective Assessment of the Diagnostic Accuracy of Instantaneous Wave‐Free Ratio to Assess Coronary Stenosis Relevance: Results of ADVISE II International, Multicenter Study (ADenosine Vasodilator Independent Stenosis Evaluation II). JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions 2015; 8:824–33. doi:10.1016/j.jcin.2015.01.029
67 67 Davies RPSNE‐PEPFE. Fractional Flow Reserve–Guided Revascularization. JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions 2013; 6:222–5. doi:10.1016/j.jcin.2012.10.014
68 68 Sen S, Asrress KN, Nijjer S, et al. Diagnostic classification of the instantaneous wave‐free ratio is equivalent to fractional flow reserve and is not improved with adenosine administration. Results of CLARIFY (Classification Accuracy of Pressure‐Only Ratios Against Indices Using Flow Study). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013; 61:1409–20. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2013.01.034
69 69 van de Hoef TP, Nolte F, Damman P, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of combined intracoronary pressure and flow velocity information during baseline conditions: adenosine‐free assessment of functional coronary lesion severity. Circulation Cardiovascular Interventions 2012; 5:508–14. doi:10.1161/CIRCINTER‐VENTIONS.111.965707
70 70 Petraco R, van de Hoef TP, Nijjer S, et al. Baseline instantaneous wave‐free ratio as a pressure‐only estimation of underlying coronary flow reserve: results of the JUSTIFY‐CFR Study (Joined Coronary Pressure and Flow Analysis to Determine Diagnostic Characteristics of Basal and Hyperemic Indices of Functional Lesion Severity‐Coronary Flow Reserve). Circulation Cardiovascular Interventions 2014; 7:492–502. doi:10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.113.000926
71 71 De Waard G, Danad I, da Cunha RP, et al. Hyperemic FFR and baseline iFR have an equivalent diagnostic accuracy when compared to myocardial blood flow quantified by H2O15 PET perfusion imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014; 63:A1692. doi:10.1016/s0735‐1097(14)61695‐8
72 72 de Waard GA, Danad I, Petraco R, et al. Fractional flow reserve, instantaneous wave‐free ratio, and resting Pd/Pa compared with [15O]H2O positron emission tomography myocardial perfusion imaging: a PACIFIC trial sub‐study. Euro Heart J. 2018; 39:4072–81. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehy632
73 73 Davies JE, Sen S, Dehbi H‐M, et al. Use of the Instantaneous Wave‐free Ratio or Fractional Flow Reserve in PCI. The New England Journal of Medicine 2017; 376:1824–34. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1700445
74 74 van't Veer M, Pijls NHJ, Hennigan B, et al. Comparison of Different Diastolic Resting Indexes to iFR: Are They All Equal? J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017; 70:3088–96. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2017.10.066
75 75 Ligthart J, Masdjedi K, Witberg K, et al. Validation of Resting Diastolic Pressure Ratio Calculated by a Novel Algorithm and Its Correlation With Distal Coronary Artery Pressure to Aortic Pressure, Instantaneous Wave–Free Ratio, and Fractional Flow Reserve. Circulation Cardiovascular Interventions 2018; 11:1–10. doi:10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.118.006911
76 76 Svanerud J, Ahn J‐M, Jeremias A, et al. Validation of a novel non‐hyperaemic index of coronary artery stenosis severity: the Resting Full‐cycle Ratio (VALIDATE RFR) study. EuroIntervention 2018; 14:806–14. doi:10.4244/EIJ‐D‐18‐00342
77 77 Leone AM, Martin‐Reyes R, Baptista SB, et al. The Multi‐center Evaluation of the Accuracy of the Contrast MEdium INduced Pd/Pa RaTiO in Predicting FFR (MEMENTO‐FFR) Study. EuroIntervention: Journal of EuroPCR in Collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology 2016; 12:708–15. doi:10.4244/EIJV12I6A115
78 78 Leone AM, Scalone G, De Maria GL, et al. Efficacy of contrast medium induced Pd/Pa ratio in predicting functional significance of intermediate coronary artery stenosis assessed by fractional flow reserve: insights from the RINASCI study. EuroIntervention: Journal of EuroPCR in Collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology 2015; 11:421–7. doi:10.4244/EIJY14M07_02
79 79 Ahmad Y, Vendrik J, Eftekhari A, et al. Determining the Predominant Lesion in Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis and Coronary Stenoses. Circulation Cardiovascular Interventions 2019; 12:1409.
80 80 Warisawa T, Cook CM, Rajkumar C, et al. Safety of Revascularization Deferral of Left Main Stenosis Based on Instantaneous Wave‐Free Ratio Evaluation. JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions 2020; :1–10. doi:10.1016/j.jcin.2020.02.035
81 81 Indolfi C, Mongiardo A, Spaccarotella C, et al. The instantaneous wave‐free ratio (iFR) for
