CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

血流储备分数

Abstract

Recommended Article

Cutoff Value and Long-Term Prediction of Clinical Events by FFR Measured Immediately After Implantation of a Drug-Eluting Stent in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease: 1- to 3-Year Results From the DKCRUSH VII Registry Study Clinical value of post-percutaneous coronary intervention fractional flow reserve value: A systematic review and meta-analysis Prognostic Value of Fractional Flow Reserve Measured Immediately After Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation Prognostic Implication of Thermodilution Coronary Flow Reserve in Patients Undergoing Fractional Flow Reserve Measurement Anatomical plaque and vessel characteristics are associated with hemodynamic indices including fractional flow reserve and coronary flow reserve: A prospective exploratory intravascular ultrasound analysis Clinical Significance of Concordance or Discordance Between Fractional Flow Reserve and Coronary Flow Reserve for Coronary Physiological Indices, Microvascular Resistance, and Prognosis After Elective Percutaneous Coronary Intervention FFR-guided multivessel stenting reduces urgent revascularization compared with infarct-related artery only stenting in ST-elevation myocardial infarction: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials Correlation between frequency-domain optical coherence tomography and fractional flow reserve in angiographically-intermediate coronary lesions

Original ResearchVolume 13, Issue 8, April 2020

JOURNAL:JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions Article Link

The Natural History of Nonculprit Lesions in STEMI: An FFR Substudy of the Compare-Acute Trial

Z Piróth, BM B-de Klerk, E Omerovic et al. Keywords: FFR;nonculprit lesions; STEMI

ABSTRACT


OBJECTIVES - The aim of this study was to determine the prognostic value of fractional flow reserve (FFR) in non-infarct-related arteries (IRAs) in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (MI).

 

BACKGROUND - Patients with ST-segment elevation MI often present with multivessel disease. The treatment of non-IRAs is debated. The applicability of FFR has not been widely proved.

 

METHODS - Outcomes were analyzed in all patients in the Compare-Acute (Comparison Between FFR Guided Revascularization Versus Conventional Strategy in Acute STEMI Patients With MVD) trial in whom, after successful primary percutaneous coronary intervention, non-IRAs were interrogated using FFR and treated medically. The treating cardiologist was blinded to the FFR value. The primary endpoint was the composite of cardiovascular mortality, target vesselrelated (non-IRA with FFR measurement at primary percutaneous coronary intervention) nonfatal MI, and target vessel revascularization: major adverse cardiac events (MACE) at 24 months.

 

RESULTS -  A total of 751 patients (963 vessels) were included. Target non-IRAs with MACE had lower FFR compared with those without (0.78 vs. 0.84, respectively; p < 0.001). The median FFR of non-IRAs with TVR was lower than that of those without (0.79 vs. 0.85, respectively; p < 0.001). The difference was significant in all vessels. The median FFR of target non-IRAs with MI was lower than that of those without (0.79 vs. 0.84, respectively; p = 0.016). The MACE rate was significantly (p < 0.001) higher in the lowest of FFR tertiles (<0.80) compared with the others (0.80 to 0.87 and 0.88).

 

CONCLUSIONS - In patients with ST-segment elevation MI with multivessel disease, FFR measured in the medically treated non-IRA immediately after successful primary percutaneous coronary intervention shows a nonlinear and inverse risk continuum of MACE. Importantly, worsening prognosis is demonstrated around the cutoff of 0.80.