CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

Acute Coronary Syndrom

科研文章

荐读文献

Risk Stratification for Patients in Cardiogenic Shock After Acute Myocardial Infarction Mortality and morbidity in acutely ill adults treated with liberal versus conservative oxygen therapy (IOTA): a systematic review and meta-analysis No causal effects of plasma homocysteine levels on the risk of coronary heart disease or acute myocardial infarction: A Mendelian randomization study Australian Trends in Procedural Characteristics and Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Galectin-3 Levels and Outcomes After Myocardial Infarction: A Population-Based Study Precisely Tuned Inhibition of HIF Prolyl Hydroxylases Is Key for Cardioprotection After Ischemia Relationship between therapeutic effects on infarct size in acute myocardial infarction and therapeutic effects on 1-year outcomes: A patient-level analysis of randomized clinical trials Short term outcome following acute phase switch among P2Y12 inhibitors in patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome treated with PCI: A systematic review and meta-analysis including 22,500 patients from 14 studies Effect of a Restrictive vs Liberal Blood Transfusion Strategy on Major Cardiovascular Events Among Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction and Anemia: The REALITY Randomized Clinical Trial Association of Acute Procedural Results with Long-term Outcomes After CTO-PCI

Clinical Trial2015 Jan 7;36(2):100-11.

JOURNAL:Eur Heart J. Article Link

Fractional flow reserve vs. angiography in guiding management to optimize outcomes in non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: the British Heart Foundation FAMOUS-NSTEMI randomized trial

Layland J, Oldroyd KG, FAMOUS–NSTEMI investigators. Keywords: Acute coronary syndrome; Coronary revascularization; Fractional flow reserve; Medical therapy; Non-ST elevation myocardial infarction

ABSTRACT


AIM - We assessed the management and outcomes of non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) patients randomly assigned to fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guided management or angiography-guided standard care.


METHODS AND RESULTS - We conducted a prospective, multicentre, parallel group, 1 : 1 randomized, controlled trial in 350 NSTEMI patients with ≥1 coronary stenosis ≥30% of the lumen diameter assessed visually (threshold for FFR measurement) (NCT01764334). Enrolment took place in six UK hospitals from October 2011 to May 2013. Fractional flow reserve was disclosed to the operator in the FFR-guided group (n = 176). Fractional flow reserve was measured but not disclosed in the angiography-guided group (n = 174). Fractional flow reserve ≤0.80 was an indication for revascularization by percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG). The median (IQR) time from the index episode of myocardial ischaemia to angiography was 3 (2, 5) days. For the primary outcome, the proportion of patients treated initially by medical therapy was higher in the FFR-guided group than in the angiography-guided group [40 (22.7%) vs. 23 (13.2%), difference 95% (95% CI: 1.4%, 17.7%), P = 0.022]. Fractional flow reserve disclosure resulted in a change in treatment between medical therapy, PCI or CABG in 38 (21.6%) patients. At 12 months, revascularization remained lower in the FFR-guided group [79.0 vs. 86.8%, difference 7.8% (-0.2%, 15.8%), P = 0.054]. There were no statistically significant differences in health outcomes and quality of life between the groups.

CONCLUSION - In NSTEMI patients, angiography-guided management was associated with higher rates of coronary revascularization compared with FFR-guided management. A larger trial is necessary to assess health outcomes and cost-effectiveness.

© The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.