CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Coronary artery bypass graft surgery versus percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with three-vessel disease and left main coronary disease: 5-year follow-up of the randomised, clinical SYNTAX trial Qualitative and Mixed Methods Provide Unique Contributions to Outcomes Research Intravascular Ultrasound Guidance Reduces Cardiac Death and Coronary Revascularization in Patients Undergoing Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation: Results From a Meta-Analysis of 9 Randomized Trials and 4724 Patients Mitral Valve Remodeling and Strain in Secondary Mitral Regurgitation: Comparison With Primary Regurgitation and Normal Valves Association of loop diuretics use and dose with outcomes in outpatients with heart failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies involving 96,959 patients Antithrombotics From Aspirin to DOACs in Coronary Artery Disease and Atrial Fibrillation (Part 3/5) 2-year outcomes with the Absorb bioresorbable scaffold for treatment of coronary artery disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of seven randomised trials with an individual patient data substudy IVUS Guidance for Coronary Revascularization: When to Start, When to Stop? Is Acute heart failure a distinctive disorder? An analysis from BIOSTAT-CHF Impact of different final optimization techniques on long-term clinical outcomes of left main cross-over stenting

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.