CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Dapagliflozin for treating chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction Randomized Evaluation of Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction Patients With Acute Heart Failure and Dopamine - The ROPA-DOP Trial A volumetric intravascular ultrasound comparison of early drug-eluting stent thrombosis versus restenosis Impact of epicardial adipose tissue on cardiovascular haemodynamics, metabolic profile, and prognosis in heart failure Coronary plaque redistribution after stent implantation is determined by lipid composition: A NIRS-IVUS analysis Outcomes 2 Years After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients at Low Surgical Risk Rivaroxaban Plus Aspirin Versus Aspirin in Relation to Vascular Risk in the COMPASS Trial Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement During Pregnancy 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 Echocardiographic Screening for Pulmonary Hypertension in Congenital Heart Disease: JACC Review Topic of the Week

Review ArticleJanuary 2017, Volume 183, Pages 1–9

JOURNAL:Am Heart J. Article Link

Clinical value of post-percutaneous coronary intervention fractional flow reserve value: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Rimac G, Fearon WF, Bertrand OF et al. Keywords: post-percutaneous coronary intervention; fractional flow reserve

ABSTRACT


BACKGROUND - Fractional flow reserve (FFR) prior to percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is useful to guide treatment. Whether post-PCI FFR assessment might have clinical impact is controversial. The aim of this study is to evaluate the range of post-PCI FFR values and analyze the relationship between post-PCI FFR and clinical outcomes.


METHODS - We systematically searched the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases with cross-referencing of articles reporting post-PCI FFR and correlating post-PCI FFR values and clinical outcomes. The outcomes of interest were the immediate post-PCI FFR values and the correlations between post-PCI FFR and the incidence of repeat intervention and major adverse cardiac events (MACE).


RESULTS - From 1995 to 2015, a total of 105 studies (n = 7470) were included, with 46 studies reporting post-PCI FFR and 59 studies evaluating relationship between post-PCI and clinical outcomes up to 30 months after PCI. Overall, post-PCI FFR values demonstrated a normal distribution with a mean value of 0.90 ± 0.04. There was a positive correlation between the percentage of stent use and post-PCI FFR (P < .0001). Meta-regression analysis indicated that higher post-PCI FFR values were associated with reduced rates of repeat intervention (P < .0001) and MACE (P = .0013). A post-PCI FFR ≥0.90 was associated with significantly lower risk of repeat PCI (odds ratio 0.43, 95% CI 0.34-0.56, P < .0001) and MACE (odds ratio 0.71, 95% CI 0.59-0.85, P = .0003).


CONCLUSIONS - FFR measurement after PCI was associated with prognostic significance. Further investigation is required to assess the role of post-PCI FFR and validate cutoff values in contemporary clinical practice.