CHAMGAP
APPROVEDReviewed and approved by the Chamgap Editorial Team (2026-08-15). The draft was written by AI, the existence of all 2 cited sources was verified at the original page, and the verdict passed blind grading and adversarial audit. Methodology v0.7.
Verdict No. 2674 · Search date 2026-08-15 · Methodology v0.7

Physiology-guided complete revascularization,
does it really help with Reduced death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or ischemia-driven revascularization?

30-Second Summary
B
Evidence Grade B · 72 · Safety caution
Physiology-guided complete revascularization reduced one-year clinical events in older patients with MI, with benefit sustained at three years
Additional PCI can cause bleeding, vascular complications, contrast-associated kidney injury, and added antiplatelet burden. FIRE found no significant difference in its safety composite, but frailty and kidney function still require individual assessment.
What the
research shows
The grade is B with 72 points. FIRE randomized 1,445 patients aged at least 75 years with myocardial infarction and multivessel disease. At one year, death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or ischemia-driven revascularization occurred in 113/720 (15.7%) with complete revascularization versus 152/725 (21.0%) with culprit-only treatment, HR 0.73 (95% CI 0.57 to 0.93). At three years the result persisted, 22.9% versus 29.8%, HR 0.72 (0.58 to 0.88), but this was follow-up of the same trial.
What the
ads claim
This verdict is restricted to patients aged at least 75 years with myocardial infarction, multivessel disease, and successful culprit-lesion PCI. It cannot be transferred directly to younger patients, stable angina, cardiogenic shock, or anatomy-only complete revascularization.
*

Useful facts when choosing a product

  • Functional significance of nonculprit lesions was assessed by pressure wire or quantitative angiography.
  • The one-year and three-year papers report the same FIRE trial.
Gap Measurement · Verdict 2674 · B 72
What advertising claims
What independent, higher-quality research supports
△ GAP
01

What the research actually shows

At 34 centers in Italy, Spain, and Poland, 1,445 participants were centrally assigned by a concealed web system to complete revascularization, 720, or culprit-only treatment, 725, and all were included in the primary analysis. The article and NCT03772743 matched for intervention, comparator, and primary endpoint. The nonprofit Consorzio Futuro in Ricerca sponsored the trial but received unrestricted funding from several device companies.

02

Why this is classified as B (72)

A large hard-outcome trial found sustained event reduction, but it remains one trial with mixed industry funding and possible open-label influence on repeat-revascularization decisions, giving B with 72 points.

Counterpoint. Additional PCI brings contrast, bleeding, vascular, and antiplatelet burdens, so physiology and patient frailty must be considered together.

Rejudgment record. Cross-check applied — Cross-checked the FIRE main report, three-year follow-up, and NCT03772743 for central allocation, primary endpoint, all-randomized analysis, event adjudication, funding, and duplicate reports

Scoring profile behind this grade
EndpointHHard endpoint - actual events such as death
ReplicationR1Single confirmatory trial
IndependenceI1Mixed funding sources
Effect sizeE+Meets the clinically important threshold

The scoring table and the verdict agree (B).

Sub-claim grades by effect

This ingredient is marketed for several effects. A single overall grade blends strong and weak claims together, so each effect is graded separately here. The overall grade reflects the strongest disconfirming or core claim.

Effect (sub-claim)GradeBasis
Reduced death, MI, stroke, or ischemia-driven revascularization at one yearBRates were 15.7% versus 21.0%, HR 0.73.
Sustained benefit at three yearsBRates were 22.9% versus 29.8%, HR 0.72, in follow-up of the same trial.

Cross-check — Codex and Claude

This verdict was drafted by Codex through literature review and source-existence checks, cross-checked through blind grading and adversarial audit, and settled by reapplying the methodology boundary rules. Cases with split grades were resolved through rejudgment.
03

Evidence Table

StudyDesignSampleFundingEndpointResultWeight
Study 1Open-label randomized trial with blinded event adjudication at 34 centers and three-year follow-up of the same trial725Nonprofit Consorzio Futuro in Ricerca sponsorship with unrestricted funding from several device companiesComposite of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or ischemia-driven revascularizationAt one year, 113/720 (15.7%) versus 152/725 (21.0%), HR 0.73 (95% CI 0.57 to 0.93); at three years, 165/720 (22.9%) versus 216/725 (29.8%), HR 0.72 (0.58 to 0.88)Single large hard-outcome trial and same-cohort follow-up
§

Receipt — 2 References

All 2 cited sources were verified for existence at the original page (as of 2026-08-15).

Biscaglia S, Guiducci V, Escaned J, Moreno R, Lanzilotti V, Santarelli A, Cerrato E, Sacchetta G, Jurado-Roman A, Menozzi A, Amat Santos I, Díez Gil JL, Ruozzi M, Barbierato M, Fileti L, Picchi A, Lodolini V, Biondi-Zoccai G, Maietti E, Pavasini R, Cimaglia P, Tumscitz C, Erriquez A, Penzo C, Colaiori I, Pignatelli G, Casella G, Iannopollo G, Menozzi M, Varbella F, Caretta G, Dudek D, Barbato E, Tebaldi M, Campo G, FIRE Trial Investigators. Complete or Culprit-Only PCI in Older Patients with Myocardial Infarction. N Engl J Med. 2023;389:889-898. PMID: 37634150. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2300468. NCT03772743.
checked
Biscaglia S, Erriquez A, Guiducci V, Escaned J, Moreno R, Lanzilotti V, Santarelli A, Cerrato E, Sacchetta G, Menozzi A, Amat-Santos I, Díez Gil JL, Ruozzi M, Barbierato M, Fileti L, Picchi A, Pavasini R, Cimaglia P, Colaiori I, Casella G, Menozzi M, Cavazza C, Caretta G, Scarsini R, D'Amico G, Vadalà G, Pilato G, Moscarella E, Tebaldi M, Campo G. Physiology-Guided Complete Revascularization in Older Patients With Myocardial Infarction: Three-Year Outcomes of a Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Cardiol. 2025;10(11):1130-1137. PMID: 40879426. DOI: 10.1001/jamacardio.2025.3099. NCT03772743.
checked
Draft and rewrite: Codex (AI) · Verification: Codex blind grading and adversarial audit · Final adjudication: Claude
Reviewed and approved: Chamgap Editorial Team · Approval date: 2026-08-15 · Corrections: none

Cite this verdict

Physiology-guided complete revascularization x clinical events after MI at age 75 or older Evidence Grade B card
[Chamgap] Physiology-guided complete revascularization x clinical events after MI at age 75 or older — Evidence Grade B·72. 2 cited sources checked. Source: https://chamgap.com/en/verdicts/heart/fire-physiology-guided-complete-revascularization-older-mi/ · CC BY 4.0

CC BY 4.0 — free to use with attribution; do not distort grades, numbers, or verdict meaning.

!

What this document does and does not do

Chamgap is an information source. It reports what research has and has not confirmed; it does not tell readers what to take or buy. That decision belongs to readers and, when needed, medical or legal professionals. This verdict reflects literature available up to the search date and may change as new research appears. Nothing here is medical advice.