Key considerations in a meta-analysis of physiology-guided percutaneous vs surgical revascularization in multivessel coronary artery disease

doi:10.4330/wjc.v18.i3.115153

Advanced Search

BPG is committed to discovery and dissemination of knowledge

Home / Archive / Volume 18, Issue 3

This Article

Google Scholar

Peer-Review Report of This Article

CrossCheck and Google Search of This Article

Academic Rules and Norms of This Article

Citation of this article

Corresponding Author of This Article

Research Domain of This Article

Article-Type of This Article

Open-Access Policy of This Article

Times Cited Counts in Google of This Article

Number of Hits and Downloads for This Article

Total Article Views (0)

All Articles published online

The chart showing PDF series, HTML series.

Item

Count

PDF

HTML

Sum=24

Publishing Process of This Article

The chart showing Browse series, Download series.

Item

Count

Browse

Download

Sum=1

Mar 26, 2026 (publication date) through Mar 23, 2026

Times Cited of This Article

Times Cited (0)

Journal Information of This Article

Publication Name

World Journal of Cardiology

ISSN

1949-8462

Publisher of This Article

Baishideng Publishing Group Inc, 7041 Koll Center Parkway, Suite 160, Pleasanton, CA 94566, USA

Letter to the Editor

Copyright: ©Author(s) 2026. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license. No commercial re-use. See permissions. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc.

World J Cardiol. Mar 26, 2026; 18(3): 115153
Published online Mar 26, 2026. doi: 10.4330/wjc.v18.i3.115153

Key considerations in a meta-analysis of physiology-guided percutaneous vs surgical revascularization in multivessel coronary artery disease

Tsung Ying Tsai, Scot Garg, Patrick W Serruys

Tsung Ying Tsai, Patrick W Serruys, CORRIB Research Centre for Advanced Imaging and Core Laboratory, University of Galway, Galway H91YR71, Ireland

Scot Garg, Department of Cardiology, Royal Blackburn Hospital, Blackburn BB2 3HH, United Kingdom

Scot Garg, School of Medicine, University of Lancashire, Preston PR1 2HE, United Kingdom

Author contributions: Tsai TY conceptualized and wrote the original manuscript; Garg S edited the manuscript; Serruys PW conceptualized the manuscript; and all authors thoroughly reviewed and approved the final manuscript.

Conflict-of-interest statement: All the authors report no relevant conflicts of interest for this article.

Corresponding author: Patrick W Serruys, MD, PhD, Professor, CORRIB Research Centre for Advanced Imaging and Core Laboratory, University of Galway, No. 1 Newcastle Road, Galway H91YR71, Ireland. patrick.w.j.c.serruys@gmail.com

Received: October 13, 2025
Revised: December 7, 2025
Accepted: January 7, 2026
Published online: March 26, 2026
Processing time: 165 Days and 9.5 Hours

Core Tip

Core Tip: The recent meta-analysis by Kataveni et al was timely in a field with scarce randomized data. However, the authors appear to have included two manuscripts derived from the same Fractional Flow Reserve Versus Angiography for Multivessel Evaluation 3 population and misclassified the registry-based study by Di Gioia et al as a randomized trial. These issues warrant further clarification and underscore the need for future editorial and peer-review oversight in this area.