CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Fractional Flow Reserve

Abstract

Recommended Article

Diagnostic Performance of Angiogram-Derived Fractional Flow Reserve: A Pooled Analysis of 5 Prospective Cohort Studies Coronary CT Angiographic and Flow Reserve-Guided Management of Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart Disease Prognostic Implications of Plaque Characteristics and Stenosis Severity in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease Safety of the Deferral of Coronary Revascularization on the Basis of Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio and Fractional Flow Reserve Measurements in Stable Coronary Artery Disease and Acute Coronary Syndromes Utilization and Outcomes of Measuring Fractional Flow Reserve in Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart Disease Association of Improvement in Fractional Flow Reserve With Outcomes, Including Symptomatic Relief, After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Anatomical and Functional Computed Tomography for Diagnosing Hemodynamically Significant Coronary Artery Disease: A Meta-Analysis 5-Year Outcomes of PCI Guided by Measurement of Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio Versus Fractional Flow Reserve
|<<... 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 >>|

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

BACKGROUND - Understanding 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 RESULTS - A 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.

CONCLUSIONS - Global 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 REGISTRATION - URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01621438.

© 2018 The Authors. Published on behalf of the American Heart Association, Inc., by Wiley.
>CBS CBS 2019

> CBS 2019 REGISTRATION

> CBS 2019 PROGRAM

> CBS 2019 CALL FOR SCIENCE

> CBS 2019 SPOTLIGHTS

 CBSMD

> CBSMD WEBSITE REGISTRATION

> EDUCATION CENTER

> RECOMMANDED PAPER

> TOP 10 RESEARCH PAPER

> PRE-READING

CBS 2019 CBS 2019 FACULTY Education Resource CBSMD Scientific Library
Copyright ⓒ CBS MD Nanjing China. All rights reserved. 京ICP备16025898号-11
联系我们| Top