CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Acute Coronary Syndrom

Abstract

Recommended Article

Elective Coronary Revascularization Procedures in Patients With Stable Coronary Artery Disease: Incidence, Determinants, and Outcome (From the CORONOR Study) Restenosis, Stent Thrombosis, and Bleeding Complications - Navigating Between Scylla and Charybdis Precisely Tuned Inhibition of HIF Prolyl Hydroxylases Is Key for Cardioprotection After Ischemia Chronic total occlusion intervention of the non-infarct-related artery in acute myocardial infarction patients: the Korean multicenter chronic total occlusion registry Anticoagulation combined with antiplatelet therapy in patients with left ventricular thrombus after first acute myocardial infarction Impact of Off-Hours Versus On-Hours Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention on Myocardial Damage and Clinical Outcomes in ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Risk Stratification for Patients in Cardiogenic Shock After Acute Myocardial Infarction Ticagrelor alone vs. ticagrelor plus aspirin following percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes: TWILIGHT-ACS

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.