CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Assessment of Vascular Dysfunction in Patients Without Obstructive Coronary Artery Disease: Why, How, and When Surgical ineligibility and mortality among patients with unprotected left main or multivessel coronary artery disease undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention Stress Echocardiography and PH: What Do the Findings Mean? New-onset atrial fibrillation after PCI and CABG for left main disease: insights from the EXCEL trial and additional studies Infective endocarditis after transcatheter aortic valve implantation: a nationwide study Treatment and prevention of lipoprotein(a)-mediated cardiovascular disease: the emerging potential of RNA interference therapeutics Dual Antiplatelet TherapyIs It Time to Cut the Cord With Aspirin? 2019 AHA/ACC Clinical Performance and Quality Measures for Adults With High Blood Pressure: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Performance Measures Safety and efficacy of the bioabsorbable polymer everolimus-eluting stent versus durable polymer drug-eluting stents in high-risk patients undergoing PCI: TWILIGHT-SYNERGY Leaflet immobility and thrombosis in transcatheter aortic valve replacement
|<<... 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 ...>>|

Original ResearchVolume 11, Issue 15, August 2018

JOURNAL：JACC Cardiovasc Interv. Article Link

Prognostic Implication of Thermodilution Coronary Flow Reserve in Patients Undergoing Fractional Flow Reserve Measurement

JM Lee, KH Choi, D Hwang et al. Keywords: coronary artery disease; coronary flow reserve; fractional flow reserve; myocardial ischemia; percutaneous coronary intervention; prognosis

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES - This study investigated the prognostic implication of coronary flow reserve (CFR) in patients who underwent fractional flow reserve (FFR) measurement.


BACKGROUND - Limited data are available regarding the long-term prognosis associated with thermodilution CFR in patients with coronary artery disease.

METHODS - A total of 519 patients (737 vessels) who did not undergo revascularization were classified according to FFR and CFR values. Low FFR and low CFR were defined with upper thresholds of 0.8 and 2.0, respectively. FFR and CFR were measured by a pressure-temperature sensor–tipped wire. Clinical outcomes were assessed by the vessel-oriented composite outcome (VOCO) (a composite of cardiac death, vessel-specific myocardial infarction, and vessel-specific revascularization) during 5 years of follow-up.

RESULTS - The categorical agreement (kappa = 0.080; p = 0.024) between FFR and CFR were modest, and 30.6% of the population showed discordant results between FFR and CFR. During 5 years of follow-up, patients with low CFR had a significantly higher risk of VOCO than did those with high CFR (hazard ratio [HR]: 3.171; 95% CI: 1.664 to 6.042; p < 0.001). Among patients with high FFR, there were no differences in clinical risk factor profiles, FFR, or stenosis severity between the high-CFR and low-CFR groups, and low CFR was an independent predictor for VOCO (HR: 4.999; 95% CI: 2.104 to 11.879; p < 0.001). In a 4-group classification according to both FFR and CFR, patients with low FFR and low CFR had the highest risk of VOCO (17.9%; overall p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS - Patients with low CFR had a significantly higher risk of clinical events during 5 years of follow-up. Low CFR was an independent predictor for patient-oriented composite outcome among patients with high FFR. These results support the value of CFR in patients who undergo FFR measurement. (Clinical, Physical and Prognostic Implication of Microvascular Status; NCT02186093)
>CBS CBS 2019

> CBS 2019

> CBS 2019 注册

> CBS 2019 会议日程

> CBS 2019 学术征集

> CBS 2019 热点

 CBSMD

> CBSMD 网站注册

> 教育中心

> 荐读文献

> Top 10 阅读文献

> 文献导读
CBS 2019 CBS 2019 主席团 教育中心 科研动态
Copyright ⓒ CBS MD Nanjing China. All rights reserved. 京ICP备16025898号-11
联系我们| Top