CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Fractional Flow Reserve

Abstract

Recommended Article

Lesion-Specific and Vessel-Related Determinants of Fractional Flow Reserve Beyond Coronary Artery Stenosis Physiology-Based Revascularization: A New Approach to Plan and Optimize Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: State-of-the-Art Review Fractional flow reserve derived from computed tomography coronary angiography in the assessment and management of stable chest pain: the FORECAST randomized trial High-Resolution Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging Techniques for the Identification of Coronary Microvascular Dysfunction Fractional flow reserve in clinical practice: from wire-based invasive measurement to image-based computation Relationship between fractional flow reserve value and the amount of subtended myocardium Clinical implications of three-vessel fractional flow reserve measurement in patients with coronary artery disease The Natural History of Nonculprit Lesions in STEMI: An FFR Substudy of the Compare-Acute Trial

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.