Park SH & Koo BK. Clinical application of FFR in bifurcation lesions 283 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 flow velocity reserve, hyperemic flow versus pressure slope index, and fractional flow reserve. Circulation 1996; 94: 1842–1849. Pijls NH, Van Gelder B, Van der Voort P, et al. Fractional flow reserve. A useful index to evaluate the influence of an epicardial coronary stenosis on myocardial blood flow. Circulation 1995; 92: 3183–3193. Tonino PA, De Bruyne B, Pijls NH, et al. Fractional flow reserve versus angiography for guiding percutaneous coronary intervention. N Engl J Med 2009; 360: 213–224. Pijls NH, van Schaardenburgh P, Manoharan G, et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention of functionally nonsignificant stenosis: 5-year follow-up of the defer study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007; 49: 2105–2111. Pijls NH, Fearon WF, Tonino PA, et al. Fractional flow reserve versus angiography for guiding percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease: 2-year follow-up of the fame (fractional flow reserve versus angiography for multivessel evaluation) study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2010; 56: 177–184. Fearon WF, Bornschein B, Tonino PA, et al. Economic evaluation of fractional flow reserve-guided percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with multivessel disease. Circulation 2010; 122: 2545–2550. Wijns W, Kolh P, Danchin N, et al. Guidelines on myocardial revascularization. Eur Heart J 2010; 31: 2501–2555. Topol EJ, Nissen SE. Our preoccupation with coronary luminology. The dissociation between clinical and angiographic findings in ischemic heart disease. Circulation 1995; 92: 2333–2342. Smith SC, Jr., Dove JT, Jacobs AK, et al. Acc/aha guidelines of percutaneous coronary interventions (revision of the 1993 ptca guidelines)--executive summary. A report of the american college of cardiology/american heart association task force on practice guidelines (committee to revise the 1993 guidelines for percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty). J Am Coll Cardiol 2001; 37: 2215–2239. Ziaee A, Parham WA, Herrmann SC, et al. Lack of relation between imaging and physiology in ostial coronary artery narrowings. Am J Cardiol 2004; 93: 1404–1407, A1409. Koo BK, Yang HM, Doh JH, et al. Optimal intravascular ultrasound criteria and their accuracy for defining the functional significance of intermediate coronary stenoses of different locations. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv 2011; 4: 803–811. Kang SJ, Lee JY, Ahn JM, et al. Validation of intravascular ultrasound-derived parameters with fractional flow reserve for assessment of coronary stenosis severity. Circ Cardiovasc Interv 2011; 4: 65–71. Kang SJ, Mintz GS, Kim WJ, et al. Preintervention angiographic and intravascular ultrasound predictors for side branch compromise after a single-stent crossover technique. Am J Cardiol 2011; 107: 1787–1793. Gonzalo N, Escaned J, Alfonso F, et al. Morphometric assessment of coronary stenosis relevance with optical coherence 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 tomography: A comparison with fractional flow reserve and intra- vascular ultrasound. J Am Coll Cardiol 2012; 59: 1080–1089. Koh JS, Koo BK, Kim JH, et al. Relationship between fractional flow reserve and angiographic and intravascular ultrasound parameters in ostial lesions: Major epicardial vessel versus side branch ostial lesions. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv 2012; 5: 409–415. Pijls NH, De Bruyne B, Bech GJ, et al. Coronary pressure measurement to assess the hemodynamic significance of serial stenoses within one coronary artery: Validation in humans. Circulation 2000; 102: 2371–2377. Louvard Y, Lefevre T, Morice MC. Percutaneous coronary intervention for bifurcation coronary disease. Heart 2004; 90: 713–722. Poerner TC, Kralev S, Voelker W, et al. Natural history of small and medium-sized side branches after coronary stent implantation. Am Heart J 2002; 143: 627–635. Kralev S, Poerner TC, Basorth D, et al. Side branch occlusion after coronary stent implantation in patients presenting with st-elevation myocardial infarction: Clinical impact and angiographic predictors. Am Heart J 2006; 151: 153–157. Vassilev D, Gil RJ. Relative dependence of diameters of branches in coronary bifurcations after stent implantation in main vessel--importance of carina position. Kardiol Pol 2008; 66: 371–378; discussion 379. Escaned J, Koo BK. Functional guidance with ffr: An effective and safe way to simplify percutaneous treatment of coronary bifurcations. EuroIntervention 2012; 7: 1129–1131. Shin DH, Koo BK, Waseda K, et al. Discrepancy in the assessment of jailed side branch lesions by visual estimation and quantitative coronary angiographic analysis: Comparison with fractional flow reserve. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2011; 78: 720–726. Koo BK, Kang HJ, Youn TJ, et al. Physiologic assessment of jailed side branch lesions using fractional flow reserve. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005; 46: 633–637. Koo BK, Park KW, Kang HJ, et al. Physiological evaluation of the provisional side-branch intervention strategy for bifurcation lesions using fractional flow reserve. Eur Heart J 2008; 29: 726–732. Bellenger NG, Swallow R, Wald DS, et al. Haemodynamic significance of ostial side branch nipping following percutaneous intervention at bifurcations: A pressure wire pilot study. Heart 2007; 93: 249–250. Koo BK, Waseda K, Kang HJ, et al. Anatomic and functional evaluation of bifurcation lesions undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Circ Cardiovasc Interv 2010; 3: 113– 119. Ahn JM, Lee JY, Kang SJ, et al. Functional assessment of jailed side branches in coronary bifurcation lesions using fractional flow reserve. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv 2012; 5: 155– 161. Kumsars I, Narbute I, Thuesen L, et al. Side branch fractional flow reserve measurements after main vessel stenting: A nordic-baltic bifurcation study iii substudy. EuroIntervention 2012; 7: 1155–1161. http://www.jgc301.com; jgc@mail.sciencep.com | Journal of Geriatric Cardiology