CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

血管内超声指导

Abstract

Recommended Article

Comparison of one-year clinical outcomes between intravascular ultrasound-guided versus angiography-guided implantation of drug-eluting stents for left main lesions: a single-center analysis of a 1,016-patient cohort Intravascular Ultrasound Parameters Associated With Stent Thrombosis After Drug-Eluting Stent Deployment Comprehensive intravascular ultrasound assessment of stent area and its impact on restenosis and adverse cardiac events in 403 patients with unprotected left main disease The impact of intravascular ultrasound guidance during drug eluting stent implantation on angiographic outcomes Histopathologic validation of the intravascular ultrasound diagnosis of calcified coronary artery nodules 3-Year Outcomes of the ULTIMATE Trial Comparing Intravascular Ultrasound Versus Angiography-Guided Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation Comparison of inhospital mortality, length of hospitalization, costs, and vascular complications of percutaneous coronary interventions guided by ultrasound versus angiography Contribution of stent underexpansion to recurrence after sirolimus-eluting stent implantation for in-stent restenosis

Clinical TrialAugust 2017, Volume 10, Issue 8

JOURNAL:Circ Cardiovasc Interv. Article Link

Prognostic Value of Fractional Flow Reserve Measured Immediately After Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation

Piroth Z, Toth GG, De Bruyne B et al. Keywords: acute coronary syndromedrug-eluting stenthospitalizationmyocardial infarctionpercutaneous coronary intervention

ABSTRACT

Background The predictive value of fractional flow reserve (FFR) measured immediately after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stent placement has not been prospectively investigated. We investigated the potential of post-PCI FFR measurements to predict clinical outcome in patients from FAME 1 and 2 trials (Fractional Flow Reserve or Angiography for Multivessel Evaluation).

Methods and Results All patients of FAME 1 and FAME 2 who had post-PCI FFR measurement were included. The primary outcome was vessel-oriented composite end point at 2 years, defined as vessel-related cardiovascular death, vessel-related spontaneous myocardial infarction, and ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization. Eight hundred thirty-eight vessels in 639 patients were analyzed. Baseline FFR values did not differ between vessels with versus without vessel-oriented composite end point (0.66±0.11 versus 0.63±0.14, respectively; P=0.207). Post-PCI FFR was significantly lower in vessels with vessel-oriented composite end point (0.88±0.06 versus 0.90±0.06, respectively; P=0.019). Comparing the 2-year outcome of lower and upper tertiles of post-PCI FFR significant difference was found favoring upper tertile in terms of overall vessel-oriented composite end point (9.2% versus 3.8%, respectively; hazard ratio, 1.46; 95% confidence interval, 1.02–2.08; P=0.037) and target vessel revascularization (7.0% versus 2.4%, respectively; hazard ratio, 1.59; 95% confidence interval, 1.03–2.46; P=0.037). When adjusted to sex, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, target vessel, serial stenosis, and baseline percentage diameter stenosis, a strong trend was preserved in terms of target vessel revascularization (harzard ratio, 1.55; 95% confidence interval, 0.97–2.46; P=0.066), favoring the upper tertile. Post-PCI FFR of 0.92 was found to have the highest diagnostic accuracy; however, the positive likelihood ratio remained low (<1.4).

Conclusions A higher post-PCI FFR value is associated with a better vessel-related outcome. However, its predictive value is too low to advocate its use as a surrogate clinical end point.