CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Acute Coronary Syndrom

Abstract

Recommended Article

Remote ischaemic conditioning and healthcare system delay in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction Cardiac Troponin Elevation in Patients Without a Specific Diagnosis Effect of Shorter Door-to-Balloon Times Over 20 Years on Outcomes of Patients With Anterior ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Undergoing Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Respiratory syncytial virus infection and risk of acute myocardial infarction 1-Year Outcomes of Delayed Versus Immediate Intervention in Patients With Transient ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Frequency of nonsystem delays in ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention and implications for door-to-balloon time reporting (from the American Heart Association Mission: Lifeline program) Effect of improved door-to-balloon time on clinical outcomes in patients with ST segment elevation myocardial infarction Wearable Cardioverter-Defibrillator after Myocardial Infarction

Clinical TrialMay 16, 2021

JOURNAL:N Engl J Med. Article Link

Multivessel PCI Guided by FFR or Angiography for Myocardial Infarction

E Puymirat, G Cayla, for the FLOWER-MI Study Investigators et al. Keywords: FFR-guided vs. angiography-guided procedure; STEMI; multivessel; RCT

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND - In patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) who have multivessel disease, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for nonculprit lesions (complete revascularization) is superior to treatment of the culprit lesion alone. However, whether complete revascularization that is guided by fractional flow reserve (FFR) is superior to an angiography-guided procedure is unclear.

 

METHODS - In this multicenter trial, we randomly assigned patients with STEMI and multivessel disease who had undergone successful PCI of the infarct-related artery to receive complete revascularization guided by either FFR or angiography. The primary outcome was a composite of death from any cause, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or unplanned hospitalization leading to urgent revascularization at 1 year.

 

RESULTS - The mean (±SD) number of stents that were placed per patient for nonculprit lesions was 1.01±0.99 in the FFR-guided group and 1.50±0.86 in the angiography-guided group. During follow-up, a primary outcome event occurred in 32 of 586 patients (5.5%) in the FFR-guided group and in 24 of 577 patients (4.2%) in the angiography-guided group (hazard ratio, 1.32; 95% confidence interval, 0.78 to 2.23; P=0.31). Death occurred in 9 patients (1.5%) in the FFR-guided group and in 10 (1.7%) in the angiography-guided group; nonfatal myocardial infarction in 18 (3.1%) and 10 (1.7%), respectively; and unplanned hospitalization leading to urgent revascularization in 15 (2.6%) and 11 (1.9%), respectively.

 

CONCLUSIONS - In patients with STEMI undergoing complete revascularization, an FFR-guided strategy did not have a significant benefit over an angiography-guided strategy with respect to the risk of death, myocardial infarction, or urgent revascularization at 1 year. However, given the wide confidence intervals for the estimate of effect, the findings do not allow for a conclusive interpretation. (Funded by the French Ministry of Health and Abbott; FLOWER-MI ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02943954. )