RIPCORD 2: influence of routine pressure wire assessment on management strategy of coronary angiography for diagnosis of chest pain - interview with Nick Curzen
Reported from the European Society of Cardiology ESC Congress 2021
Panos Xaplanteris interviews Nick Curzen about this study on FFR-guided assessment of patients with chest pain when compared with angiographic guidance alone which was presented during ESC Congress 2021.
- What questions did the study seek to answer and what were the main results?
- How does RIPCORD 2 differ from previous studies on physiology driven revascularisation?
- Was every troponinemia at the emergency department considered to be a NSTEMI, thus eligible for inclusion?
- Did results differ for patients with stable angina and stabilised NSTEMI patients?
- Treatment options for FFR positive patients included OMT, PCI and CABG. How did these groups fare over time?
- Comment on how these results differ from the results of the FUTURE trial?
- Did the open label design of the study influence QoL and angina status reported by patients?
- Will this study change the uptake of pressure wire utilisation?
- Is there a RIPCORD 3 on the way?
Authors
No comments yet!