Héctor M. Garcia Garcia

Dr. Héctor M. Garcia Garcia

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

20Years (2007-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
12 June 2018 in Circulation
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
HGHéctor M. Garcia Garcia
Héctor M. Garcia Garcia
EMEugène P. McFadden
Eugène P. McFadden
AFAndrew Farb
Andrew Farb
RMRoxana Mehran
Roxana Mehran
GSGregg W. Stone
Gregg W. Stone
PSPatrick Serruys
Patrick Serruys
The Academic Research Consortium (ARC)-2 initiative revisited the clinical and angiographic end point definitions in coronary device trials, proposed in 2007, to make them more suitable for use in clinical trials that include increasingly complex lesion and patient populations and incorporate novel devices such as bioresorbable vascular scaffolds. In addition, recommendations for the incorporation of patient-related outcomes in clinical trials are proposed. Academic Research Consortium-2 is a collaborative effort between academic research organizations in the United States and Europe, device manufacturers, and European, US, and Asian regulatory bodies. Several in-person meetings were held to discuss the changes that have occurred in the device landscape and in clinical trials and regulatory pathways in the last decade. The consensus-based end point definitions in this document are endorsed by the stakeholders of this document and strongly advocated for clinical trial purposes. This Academic Research Consortium-2 document provides further standardization of end point definitions for coronary device trials, incorporating advances in technology and knowledge. Their use will aid interpretation of trial outcomes and comparison among studies, thus facilitating the evaluation of the safety and effectiveness of these devices.

21 April 2022 in Nature Reviews Cardiology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
MAMakoto Araki
Makoto Araki
SPSeung-Jung Park
Seung-Jung Park
HDHarold L. Dauerman
Harold L. Dauerman
SUShiro Uemura
Shiro Uemura
JKJung-Sun Kim
Jung-Sun Kim
IJIk-Kyung Jang
Ik-Kyung Jang

11 June 2018 in European Heart Journal
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
HGHéctor M. Garcia Garcia
Héctor M. Garcia Garcia
EMEugène P McFadden
Eugène P McFadden
AFAndrew Farb
Andrew Farb
RMRoxana Mehran
Roxana Mehran
GSGregg W Stone
Gregg W Stone
ACAcademic Research Consortium
Academic Research Consortium
The Academic Research Consortium (ARC)-2 initiative revisited the clinical and angiographic end point definitions in coronary device trials, proposed in 2007, to make them more suitable for use in clinical trials that include increasingly complex lesion and patient populations and incorporate novel devices such as bioresorbable vascular scaffolds. In addition, recommendations for the incorporation of patient-related outcomes in clinical trials are proposed. Academic Research Consortium-2 is a collaborative effort between academic research organizations in the United States and Europe, device manufacturers, and European, US, and Asian regulatory bodies. Several in-person meetings were held to discuss the changes that have occurred in the device landscape and in clinical trials and regulatory pathways in the last decade. The consensus-based end point definitions in this document are endorsed by the stakeholders of this document and strongly advocated for clinical trial purposes. This Academic Research Consortium-2 document provides further standardization of end point definitions for coronary device trials, incorporating advances in technology and knowledge. Their use will aid interpretation of trial outcomes and comparison among studies, thus facilitating the evaluation of the safety and effectiveness of these devices.

6 June 2024 in Journal of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
KNKoen Nieman
Koen Nieman
HGHéctor M. Garcia Garcia
Héctor M. Garcia Garcia
AHAlexandre Hideo-Kajita
Alexandre Hideo-Kajita
CCCarlos Collet
Carlos Collet
DDDamini Dey
Damini Dey
SAStephan Achenbach
Stephan Achenbach
In current clinical practice, qualitative or semi-quantitative measures are primarily used to report coronary artery disease on cardiac CT. With advancements in cardiac CT technology and automated post-processing tools, quantitative measures of coronary disease severity have become more broadly available. Quantitative coronary CT angiography has great potential value for clinical management of patients, but also for research. This document aims to provide definitions and standards for the performance and reporting of quantitative measures of coronary artery disease by cardiac CT.

1 March 2018 in International Journal of Cardiology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
HGHéctor M. Garcia Garcia
Héctor M. Garcia Garcia
MHMichael Haude
Michael Haude
KKKayode Kuku
Kayode Kuku
AHAlexandre Hideo-Kajita
Alexandre Hideo-Kajita
HIHüseyin Ince
Hüseyin Ince
RWRon Waksman
Ron Waksman

1 April 2020 in Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
GMGiovanni Luigi De Maria
Giovanni Luigi De Maria
HGHéctor M. Garcia Garcia
Héctor M. Garcia Garcia
RSRoberto Scarsini
Roberto Scarsini
AHAlexandre Hideo-Kajita
Alexandre Hideo-Kajita
NLNieves Gonzalo López
Nieves Gonzalo López
RWRon Waksman
Ron Waksman
Fractional flow reserve is the current invasive gold standard for assessing the ischemic potential of an angiographically intermediate coronary stenosis. Procedural cost and time, the need for coronary vessel instrumentation, and the need to administer adenosine to achieve maximal hyperemia remain integral components of invasive fractional flow reserve. The number of new alternatives to fractional flow reserve has proliferated over the last ten years using techniques ranging from alternative pressure wire metrics to anatomic simulation via angiography or intravascular imaging. This review article provides a critical description of the currently available or under-development alternatives to fractional flow reserve with a special focus on the available evidence, pros, and cons for each with a view towards their clinical application in the near future for the functional assessment of coronary artery disease.