CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Shock Team Approach in Refractory Cardiogenic Shock Requiring Short-Term Mechanical Circulatory Support: A Proof of Concept SCAI clinical expert consensus statement on the classification of cardiogenic shock: This document was endorsed by the American College of Cardiology (ACC), the American Heart Association (AHA), the Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM), and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) in April 2019 Systems of Care for ST-Segment–Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A Policy Statement From the American Heart Association Large-Bore Radial Access for Complex PCI: A Flash of COLOR With Some Shades of Grey Association of Coronary Anatomical Complexity With Clinical Outcomes After Percutaneous or Surgical Revascularization in the Veterans Affairs Clinical Assessment Reporting and Tracking Program Effects of Aspirin for Primary Prevention in Persons with Diabetes Mellitus Mechanisms and diagnostic evaluation of persistent or recurrent angina following percutaneous coronary revascularization Prevalence, Presentation and Treatment of 'Balloon Undilatable' Chronic Total Occlusions: Insights from a Multicenter US Registry Invasive Coronary Physiology After Stent Implantation: Another Step Toward Precision Medicine Randomized Comparison Between Radial and Femoral Large-Bore Access for Complex Percutaneous Coronary Intervention
|<<... 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 ...>>|

Original ResearchVolume 11, Issue 15, August 2018

JOURNAL：JACC Cardiovasc Interv. Article Link

Safety of the Deferral of Coronary Revascularization on the Basis of Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio and Fractional Flow Reserve Measurements in Stable Coronary Artery Disease and Acute Coronary Syndromes

Javier Escaned, Nicola Ryan, Hernán Mejía-Rentería Keywords: ACS; coronary physiology; deferral of revascularization; FFR; iFR; SAP

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES - The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical outcomes of patients deferred from coronary revascularization on the basis of instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) or fractional flow reserve (FFR) measurements in stable angina pectoris (SAP) and acute coronary syndromes (ACS).


BACKGROUND - Assessment of coronary stenosis severity with pressure guidewires is recommended to determine the need for myocardial revascularization.

METHODS - The safety of deferral of coronary revascularization in the pooled per-protocol population (n = 4,486) of the DEFINE-FLAIR (Functional Lesion Assessment of Intermediate Stenosis to Guide Revascularisation) and iFR-SWEDEHEART (Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio Versus Fractional Flow Reserve in Patients With Stable Angina Pectoris or Acute Coronary Syndrome) randomized clinical trials was investigated. Patients were stratified according to revascularization decision making on the basis of iFR or FFR and to clinical presentation (SAP or ACS). The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as the composite of all-cause death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or unplanned revascularization at 1 year.

RESULTS - Coronary revascularization was deferred in 2,130 patients. Deferral was performed in 1,117 patients (50%) in the iFR group and 1,013 patients (45%) in the FFR group (p < 0.01). At 1 year, the MACE rate in the deferred population was similar between the iFR and FFR groups (4.12% vs. 4.05%; fully adjusted hazard ratio: 1.13; 95% confidence interval: 0.72 to 1.79; p = 0.60). A clinical presentation with ACS was associated with a higher MACE rate compared with SAP in deferred patients (5.91% vs. 3.64% in ACS and SAP, respectively; fully adjusted hazard ratio: 0.61 in favor of SAP; 95% confidence interval: 0.38 to 0.99; p = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS - Overall, deferral of revascularization is equally safe with both iFR and FFR, with a low MACE rate of about 4%. Lesions were more frequently deferred when iFR was used to assess physiological significance. In deferred patients presenting with ACS, the event rate was significantly increased compared with SAP at 1 year.
>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