Impact of Poststenting Fractional Flow Reserve on Long-Term Clinical Outcomes: The FFR-SEARCH Study.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Diletti R
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7982137 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guided percutaneous coronary intervention has shown favorable long-term clinical outcomes. However, limited data exist evaluating the FFR assessment among the chronic kidney disease (CKD) population. The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term clinical outcomes of FFR-guided coronary revascularization in patients with CKD. A total of 242 CKD patients who underwent FFR assessment were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were divided into two groups: revascularization (FFR ≤ 0.80) and non-revascularization (FFR > 0.80). The primary endpoint was the composite of cardiac death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and target vessel failure (TVF). The key secondary endpoint was TVF. The Cox regression model was used for risk evaluation. With 91% of the ischemic vessels revascularized, the revascularization group had higher risks for both the primary endpoint (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 2.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.07-3.97; p = 0.030) and key secondary endpoint (aHR: 2.19, 95% CI: 1.10-4.37; p = 0.026), during a median follow-up of 2.9 years. This result was consistent among different CKD severities. In patients with CKD, functional ischemia in coronary artery stenosis was associated with poor clinical outcomes despite coronary revascularization.
| S-EPMC8781197 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Fractional flow reserve (FFR) is a reference invasive diagnostic test to assess the physiological significance of an epicardial coronary artery stenosis. FFR-guided percutaneous coronary intervention in stable coronary artery disease has been assessed in three seminal clinical trials and the indications for FFR assessment are expanding into other clinical scenarios. In this article we review the theoretical, experimental and clinical basis for FFR measurement. We place FFR measurement in the context of the comprehensive invasive assessment of coronary physiology in patients presenting with known or suspected angina pectoris in daily clinical practice, and review the recent developments in FFR assessment.
| S-EPMC5489582 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Physiologically driven coronary revascularization has been shown to be superior in terms of better outcomes and optimum resource utilization for percutaneous interventions. However, its applicability to surgical myocardial revascularization lacks evidence base. GRAFITTI Trial aims at bridging this gap and Dr. F Casselman discusses its rationale and design.
| S-EPMC7525716 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimsA fractional flow reserve (FFR) value ≥0.90 after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is associated with a reduced risk of adverse cardiovascular events. TARGET-FFR is an investigator-initiated, single-centre, randomized controlled trial to determine the feasibility and efficacy of a post-PCI FFR-guided optimization strategy vs. standard coronary angiography in achieving final post-PCI FFR values ≥0.90.Methods and resultsAfter angiographically guided PCI, patients were randomized 1:1 to receive a physiology-guided incremental optimization strategy (PIOS) or a blinded coronary physiology assessment (control group). The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with a final post-PCI FFR ≥0.90. Final FFR ≤0.80 was a prioritized secondary outcome. A total of 260 patients were randomized (131 to PIOS, 129 to control) and 68.1% of patients had an initial post-PCI FFR <0.90. In the PIOS group, 30.5% underwent further intervention (stent post-dilation and/or additional stenting). There was no significant difference in the primary endpoint of the proportion of patients with final post-PCI FFR ≥0.90 between groups (PIOS minus control 10%, 95% confidence interval -1.84 to 21.91, P = 0.099). The proportion of patients with a final FFR ≤0.80 was significantly reduced when compared with the angiography-guided control group (-11.2%, 95% confidence interval -21.87 to -0.35], P = 0.045).ConclusionOver two-thirds of patients had a physiologically suboptimal result after angiography-guided PCI. An FFR-guided optimization strategy did not significantly increase the proportion of patients with a final FFR ≥0.90, but did reduce the proportion of patients with a final FFR ≤0.80.
| S-EPMC8634564 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionFractional flow reserve (FFR) is recommended by society guidelines for assessment of the hemodynamic significance of intermediate coronary lesions when non-invasive evidence of myocardial ischemia is unavailable. However, the prevalence of FFR usage in current practice and how FFR values impact revascularization decisions are not well known.MethodsAt a single-center Veterans Administration Hospital, all subjects referred for coronary angiography for any indication from the period from May 2012 until January 2014 were prospectively entered into a database. FFR was measured in all intermediate coronary lesions (30-70% stenosis). Based on the FFR results, the lesions were categorized into 3 different groups: FFR > 0.80 (non-ischemic), FFR 0.75-0.80 (gray zone), and FFR < 0.75 (ischemic).ResultsA total of 1482 cardiac catheterizations were performed during the study period. FFR was performed in 347 (23%) of these procedures. The total numbers of intermediate coronary lesions evaluated with FFR were 429. The mean FFR value was 0.79 (median = 0.80; interquartile range 0.64-0.96). Among 211 non-ischemic lesions, revascularization was deferred in 201 (95%). In the gray-zone group (73 lesions), 35 (48%) lesions were treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), 11 (15%) lesions were referred for coronary artery bypass grafting surgery (CABG), and 27 (37%) lesions were treated medically. In the ischemic group (145 lesions), 82 (57%) lesions were treated with PCI, 41 (28%) lesions were referred for CABG, and 22 (15%) lesions were treated medically.ConclusionAt a Veterans Administration Hospital, FFR was performed in approximately one out of four total catheterizations. FFR documented lack of ischemia in about half of the intermediate coronary lesions, and thus reduced the need for many revascularization procedures.
| S-EPMC4675752 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeTo examine the prognostic implication of fractional flow reserve (FFR) derived from coronary CT (FFRCT) in routine clinical practice.Materials and methodsPatients referred for FFRCT analysis at a single center between October 2015 and June 2017 were retrospectively included and followed up for rates of invasive angiography and clinical events. Two hundred seven patients underwent successful FFRCT analysis with seven lost to follow-up, leaving 200 (mean age ± standard deviation, 62.4 years ± 10.0; 49 [24.5%] women) patients for analysis. At coronary CT angiography, patients were categorized as having significant stenosis (SS) in the presence of a diameter stenosis greater than or equal to 50% (hereafter, SS positive) and flow limitation in the presence of a postlesion (that is, FFRCT measured 2 cm to the distal aspect of the lesion) FFRCT less than 0.80 (hereafter, FFRCT positive). Vessel-oriented clinical events (VOCEs) were defined as vessel-related late revascularization (>90 days), myocardial infarction, and cardiac mortality.ResultsAt CT angiography, 130 (65%) studies were SS positive and 63 (31.5%) were FFRCT positive. At median follow-up of 477 days (range, 252-859 days), there were 26 VOCE end points in 22 patients: 22 revascularizations and four nonfatal myocardial infarctions. VOCE end points occurred in zero of 58 (0%) of SS-negative and FFRCT negative patients, in eight of 79 (10.1%) of SS-positive and FFRCT-negative patients, in zero of 12 (0%) of SS-negative and FFRCT-positive patients, and in 18 of 51 (35.3%) of SS-positive and FFRCT-positive patients (log-rank χ2 = 30.1; P < .001). At multivariable Cox regression, both FFRCT (hazard ratio per 0.1 decrease, 1.54 [95% confidence interval: 1.1, 2.2] P = .013) and stenosis (hazard ratio per unit increase, 2.16 [95% confidence interval: 1.25, 3.72] P = .006) were independently associated with VOCE.ConclusionStenosis and FFRCT are independent predictors of intermediate-term outcomes. In the absence of a stenosis greater than 50%, a positive FFRCT result is not associated with an increased intermediate risk.© RSNA, 2019Supplemental material is available for this article.See also commentary by Fairbairn and Bull in this issue.
| S-EPMC7970101 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PURPOSE OF REVIEW:Accumulating evidence exists for the value of coronary physiology for clinical decision-making in ischemic heart disease (IHD). The most frequently used pressure-derived index to assess stenosis severity, the fractional flow reserve (FFR), has long been considered the gold standard for this purpose, despite the fact that the FFR assesses solely epicardial stenosis severity and aims to estimate coronary flow impairment in the coronary circulation. The coronary flow reserve (CFR) directly assesses coronary blood flow in the coronary circulation, including both the epicardial coronary artery and the coronary microvasculature, but is nowadays less established than FFR. It is now recognized that both tools may provide insight into the pathophysiological substrate of ischemic heart disease, and that particularly combined FFR and CFR measurements provide a comprehensive insight into the multilevel involvement of IHD. This review discusses the diagnostic and prognostic characteristics, as well as future implications of combined assessment of FFR and CFR pressure and flow measurements as parameters for inducible ischemia. RECENT FINDINGS:FFR and CFR disagree in up to 40% of all cases, giving rise to fundamental questions regarding the role of FFR in contemporary ischemic heart disease management, and implying a renewed approach in clinical management of these patients using combined coronary pressure and flow measurement to allow appropriate identification of patients at risk for cardiovascular events. This review emphasizes the value of comprehensive coronary physiology measurements in assessing the pathophysiological substrate of IHD, and the importance of acknowledging the broad spectrum of epicardial and microcirculatory involvement in IHD. Increasing interest and large clinical trials are expected to further strengthen the potential of advanced coronary physiology in interventional cardiology, consequently inducing reconsideration of current clinical guidelines.
| S-EPMC6061210 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Data are limited regarding outcomes of deferred lesions in patients with angiographically insignificant stenosis but low fractional flow reserve (FFR). We investigated the natural history of angiographically insignificant stenosis with low FFR among patients who underwent routine 3-vessel FFR measurement. METHODS AND RESULTS:From December 2011 to March 2014, 1136 patients with 3298 vessels underwent routine 3-vessel FFR measurement (3V FFR-FRIENDS study, ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01621438), and this study analyzed the 2-year clinical outcomes of 1024 patients with 2124 lesions with angiographically insignificant stenosis (percentage of diameter stenosis <50%), in which revascularization was deferred. All lesions were classified according to FFR values, using a cutoff of 0.80 (high FFR >0.80 versus low FFR ?0.80). The primary end point was outcome of major adverse cardiovascular events (a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and ischemia-driven revascularization) at 2 years. Mean angiographic percentage of diameter stenosis and FFR of total lesions were 32.5±10.3% and 0.91±0.08%, respectively. Among the total lesions with angiographically insignificant stenosis, 8.7% showed low FFR (185 lesions). The incidence of lesions with low FFR was 2.5%, 3.8%, 9.0%, and 15.1% in categories of percentage of diameter stenosis <20%, 20% to 30%, 30% to 40%, and 40% to 50%, respectively. At 2-year follow-up, the low-FFR group showed a significantly higher risk of major adverse cardiovascular events compared with the high FFR group (3.3% versus 1.2%, hazard ratio: 3.371; 95% CI, 1.346-8.442; P=0.009). In multivariable analysis, low FFR was the most powerful independent predictor of future MACE in deferred lesions with angiographically insignificant stenosis (adjusted hazard ratio: 2.617; 95% CI, 1.026-6.679; P=0.044). CONCLUSIONS:In deferred angiographically insignificant stenosis, lesions with low FFR showed significantly higher event rates than those with high FFR. FFR was an independent predictor of future major adverse cardiovascular events in lesions with angiographically insignificant stenosis. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION:URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01621438.
| S-EPMC5586447 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDeferral of coronary revascularization is safe whether guided by instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) or by fractional flow reserve (FFR). We aimed to assess long-term outcomes in patients deferred from revascularization based on iFR or FFR in a large real-world population.MethodsFrom 2013 through 2017, 201,933 coronary angiographies were registered in the Swedish Web-System for Enhancement and Development of Evidence-Based Care in Heart Disease Evaluated According to Recommended Therapies (SWEDEHEART). We included all patients (n = 11,324) with at least 1 coronary lesion deferred from PCI during an index procedure using iFR (>0.89; n = 1998) or FFR (>0.80; n = 9326). The primary outcome was major adverse cardiac events (MACE) defined as the composite of all-cause death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or unplanned revascularization. A multivariable-adjusted Cox proportional hazards model was used, with analysis for interaction of prespecified subgroups.ResultsPatients presented with stable angina pectoris (iFR 46.9% vs FFR 48.6%), unstable angina or non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (iFR 37.7% vs FFR 33.1%), ST-elevation myocardial infarction (iFR 1.9% vs FFR 1.6%), and other indications (iFR 12.5% vs FFR 15.7%). The median follow-up was 2 years for both iFR and FFR groups. At the conclusion of the study, the cumulative MACE risks were 26.7 for the iFR group and 25.9% for FFR group. In the adjusted analysis, no difference was found between the 2 groups (adjusted hazard ratio: iFR vs FFR, 0.947; 95% CI, 0.84-1.08; P = 39). Consistent with the overall findings, the prespecified subgroups showed no interaction with the FFR/iFR results.ConclusionsDeferral of revascularization showed similar long-term safety whether based on iFR or on FFR.
| S-EPMC11307766 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) is a novel method to assess the ischemic potential of coronary artery stenoses. Clinical trial data have shown that iFR has acceptable diagnostic agreement with fractional flow reserve (FFR), the reference standard for the functional assessment of coronary stenoses. This study compares iFR measurements with FFR measurements in a real world, single-center setting.Methods and resultsInstantaneous wave-free ratio and FFR were measured in 50 coronary artery lesions in 42 patients, with FFR ≤ 0.8 classified as functionally significant. An iFR-only technique, using a treatment cut-off value, iFR ≤ 0.89, provided a classification agreement of 84% with FFR ≤ 0.80. Use of a hybrid iFR-FFR technique, incorporating FFR measurement for lesions within the iFR gray zone of 0.86-0.93, would improve classification agreement with FFR to 94%, with diagnosis achieved without the need for hyperemia in 57% patients.ConclusionThis study in a real-world setting demonstrated good classification agreement between iFR and FFR. Use of a hybrid iFR-FFR technique would achieve high diagnostic accuracy while minimizing adenosine use, compared with routine FFR.
| S-EPMC5447668 | biostudies-literature