CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Fractional Flow Reserve

Abstract

Recommended Article

New Volumetric Analysis Method for Stent Expansion and its Correlation With Final Fractional Flow Reserve and Clinical Outcome An ILUMIEN I Substudy Diagnostic accuracy of intracoronary optical coherence tomography-derived fractional flow reserve for assessment of coronary stenosis severity Identification of High-Risk Plaques Destined to Cause Acute Coronary Syndrome Using Coronary Computed Tomographic Angiography and Computational Fluid Dynamics Individual Lesion-Level Meta-Analysis Comparing Various Doses of Intracoronary Bolus Injection of Adenosine With Intravenous Administration of Adenosine for Fractional Flow Reserve Assessment Sex Differences in Adenosine-Free Coronary Pressure Indexes - A CONTRAST Substudy Retrospective Comparison of Long-Term Clinical Outcomes Between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention and Medical Therapy in Stable Coronary Artery Disease With Gray Zone Fractional Flow Reserve - COMFORTABLE Retrospective Study The Impact of Coronary Physiology on Contemporary Clinical Decision Making Angiographic quantitative flow ratio-guided coronary intervention (FAVOR III China): a multicentre, randomised, sham-controlled trial

Clinical Trial2018 Feb 15;7(4). pii: e008055.

JOURNAL:J Am Heart Assoc. Article Link

Clinical Relevance of Functionally Insignificant Moderate Coronary Artery Stenosis Assessed by 3-Vessel Fractional Flow Reserve Measurement

Park J, Lee JM, Koo BK et al. Keywords: coronary artery disease; fractional flow reserve; multivessel coronary artery disease; physiology/function; prognosis

ABSTRACT


BACKGROUNDUnderstanding of the risk conferred by functionally insignificant lesions in multiple coronary vessels is limited. We investigated the prognostic implications of coronary artery disease (CAD) based on 3-vessel fractional flow reserve (FFR).


METHODS AND RESULTSA total of 1,136 patients underwent FFR measurement in the 3 major epicardial arteries. We defined vessels with "Moderate CAD" as vessels with FFR, 0.81 to 0.87. Patients were classified into Group 1: No apparent CAD (FFR>0.87 in all 3-vessels); Group 2: Single-vessel moderate CAD; Group 3: Multivessel moderate CAD; and Group 4: Functionally significant CAD (FFR≤0.80) in any vessel. The primary end point was 2-year major adverse cardiac events, a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and ischemia-driven revascularization. Forty-three percent of patients had moderate CAD (Group 2: 403/1136, 35.5%; Group 3: 84/1136, 7.4%). The 2-year risk of major adverse cardiac events was not significantly different between patients with single-vessel moderate CAD and no apparent CAD (2.6 versus 2.6%; HR, 1.1; 95% confidence interval, 0.4%-2.8%; P=0.89). However, patients with multivessel moderate CAD were at significantly higher risk than Group 1 (7.4 versus 2.6%; hazard ratio, 3.3; 95% confidence interval, 1.1%-9.8%; P=0.03). The risk of major adverse cardiac events in patients with multivessel moderate CAD was comparable to that of patients with functionally significant CAD (hazard ratio, 1.2; 95% confidence interval, 0.5%-3.0%; P=0.67). In a multivariable regression model, multivessel moderate CAD was an independent predictor of greater risk of 2-year major adverse cardiac events.

CONCLUSIONSGlobal physiologic assessment with FFR measurement of 3 vessels can identify multivessel moderate CAD. The prognostic implication of multivessel moderate CAD appears comparable to that of functionally significant CAD.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATIONURL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01621438.

© 2018 The Authors. Published on behalf of the American Heart Association, Inc., by Wiley.