CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Fractional Flow Reserve

Abstract

Recommended Article

Diagnostic Accuracy of Angiography-Based Quantitative Flow Ratio Measurements for Online Assessment of Coronary Stenosis Fractional flow reserve versus angiography for guidance of PCI in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (FAME): 5-year follow-up of a randomised controlled trial Accuracy of Fractional Flow Reserve Derived From Coronary Angiography Physiologic Characteristics and Clinical Outcomes of Patients With Discordance Between FFR and iFR Sex Differences in Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio or Fractional Flow Reserve–Guided Revascularization Strategy Real-world clinical utility and impact on clinical decision-making of coronary computed tomography angiography-derived fractional flow reserve: lessons from the ADVANCE Registry Long-term clinical outcome after fractional flow reserve-guided treatment in patients with angiographically equivocal left main coronary artery stenosis Diagnostic accuracy of fractional flow reserve from anatomic CT angiography

Original Research2018 Jul 23;11(14):1313-1321.

JOURNAL:JACC Cardiovasc Interv. Article Link

Angiography Alone Versus Angiography Plus Optical Coherence Tomography to Guide Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Outcomes From the Pan-London PCI Cohort

Jones DA, Rathod KS, Koganti S et al. Keywords: intravascular ultrasound; optical coherence tomography; percutaneous coronary intervention

ABSTRACT


OBJECTIVES - This study aimed to determine the effect on long-term survival of using optical coherence tomography (OCT) during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).


BACKGROUND - Angiographic guidance for PCI has substantial limitations. The superior spatial resolution of OCT could translate into meaningful clinical benefits, although limited data exist to date about their effect on clinical endpoints.


METHODS - This was a cohort study based on the Pan-London (United Kingdom) PCI registry, which includes 123,764 patients who underwent PCI in National Health Service hospitals in London between 2005 and 2015. Patients undergoing primary PCI or pressure wire use were excluded leaving 87,166 patients in the study. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality at a median of 4.8 years.


RESULTS - OCT was used in 1,149 (1.3%) patients, intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) was used in 10,971 (12.6%) patients, and angiography alone in the remaining 75,046 patients. Overall OCT rates increased over time (p < 0.0001), with variation in rates between centers (p = 0.002). The mean stent length was shortest in the angiography-guided group, longer in the IVUS-guided group, and longest in the OCT-guided group. OCT-guided procedures were associated with greater procedural success rates and reduced in-hospital MACE rates. A significant difference in mortality was observed between patients who underwent OCT-guided PCI (7.7%) compared with patients who underwent either IVUS-guided (12.2%) or angiography-guided (15.7%; p < 0.0001) PCI, with differences seen for both elective (p < 0.0001) and acute coronary syndrome subgroups (p = 0.0024). Overall this difference persisted after multivariate Cox analysis (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.48; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.26 to 0.81; p = 0.001) and propensity matching (hazard ratio: 0.39; 95% CI: 0.21 to 0.77; p = 0.0008; OCT vs. angiography-alone cohort), with no difference in matched OCT and IVUS cohorts (HR: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.61 to 1.38; p = 0.43).


CONCLUSIONS - In this large observational study, OCT-guided PCI was associated with improved procedural outcomes, in-hospital events, and long-term survival compared with standard angiography-guided PCI.

 

Copyright © 2018 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.