Barry F Uretsky

Dr. Barry F Uretsky


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

35Years (1992-Present)

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

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 December 1997 in JACC
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
BUBarry F Uretsky
Barry F Uretsky
RSRichard G Sheahan
Richard G Sheahan

25 January 2002 in Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
FWFenwei Wang
Fenwei Wang
GSGeorge A. Stouffer
George A. Stouffer
SWSergio Waxman
Sergio Waxman
BUBarry F Uretsky
Barry F Uretsky

9 October 2023 in JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
CCCarlos Collet
Carlos Collet
NJNils P. Johnson
Nils P. Johnson
TMTakuya Mizukami
Takuya Mizukami
WFWilliam F. Fearon
William F. Fearon
CBColin Berry
Colin Berry
BBBernard De Bruyne
Bernard De Bruyne

6 October 2004 in JACC
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
RGRajiv Gupta
Rajiv Gupta
YBYochai Birnbaum
Yochai Birnbaum
BUBarry F Uretsky
Barry F Uretsky

4 February 2020 in Journal of the American Heart Association
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
BUBarry F Uretsky
Barry F Uretsky
SAShiv K Agarwal
Shiv K Agarwal
SVSrikanth Vallurupalli
Srikanth Vallurupalli
MAMalek Al‐Hawwas
Malek Al‐Hawwas
RHRimsha Hasan
Rimsha Hasan
AHAbdul Hakeem
Abdul Hakeem
Background: Long‐term outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) relate in part to residual ischemia in the treated vessel, as reflected by post‐PCI fractional flow reserve (FFR). The strategy of FFR after PCI and treatment of residual ischemia—known as functionally optimized coronary intervention (FCI)—may be feasible and capable of improving outcomes. Methods and Results: Feasibility and results of FCI using an optical‐sensor pressure wire were prospectively evaluated in an all‐comer population with 50% to 99% lesions and ischemic FFR (≤0.80; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT03227588). FCI was attempted in 250 vessels in 226 consecutive patients. The PCI success rate was 99.6% (249/250 vessels). FCI technical success—that is, FFR before and after PCI and PCI itself using the FFR wire—was 92% (230/250 vessels). Incidence of residual ischemia in the treated vessel was 36.5%. Approximately a third of these vessels (34.5%, n=29) were considered appropriate for further intervention, with FFR increasing from 0.71±0.07 to 0.81±0.06 ( P <0.001). Pressure wire pullback showed FFR ≤0.8 at distal stent edge was 7.9% and 0.7% proximal to the stent. FFR increase across the stent was larger in the ischemic than in the nonischemic group (0.06 [interquartile range: 0.04–0.08] versus 0.03 [interquartile range: 0.01–0.05]; P <0.0001) compatible with stent underexpansion as a contributor to residual ischemia. Conclusions: FCI is a feasible and safe clinical strategy that identifies residual ischemia in a large proportion of patients undergoing angiographically successful PCI. Further intervention can improve ischemia. The impact of this strategy on long‐term outcomes needs further study.

1 May 2019 in The American Journal of Cardiology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
XIxenogiannis iosif
xenogiannis iosif
DKDimitri Karmpaliotis
Dimitri Karmpaliotis
KAKhaldoon Alaswad
Khaldoon Alaswad
FJFarouc A. Jaffer
Farouc A. Jaffer
RYRobert W. Yeh
Robert W. Yeh
EBEmmanouil Brilakis
Emmanouil Brilakis