CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

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 Coronary Angiography after Cardiac Arrest without ST-Segment Elevation Randomized Comparison Between Radial and Femoral Large-Bore Access for Complex Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Application of High-Sensitivity Troponin in Suspected Myocardial Infarction Novel functions of macrophages in the heart: insights into electrical conduction, stress, and diastolic dysfunction Management of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Complications: Algorithms From the 2018 and 2019 Seattle Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Complications Conference Effects of Aspirin for Primary Prevention in Persons with Diabetes Mellitus European Bifurcation Club White Paper on Stenting Techniques for Patients With Bifurcated Coronary Artery Lesions Mechanisms and diagnostic evaluation of persistent or recurrent angina following percutaneous coronary revascularization Hemodynamic Response to Nitroprusside in Patients With Low-Gradient Severe Aortic Stenosis and Preserved Ejection Fraction

Original ResearchVolume 12, Issue 20, October 2019

JOURNAL:JACC Cardiovasc Interv. Article Link

Sex Differences in Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio or Fractional Flow Reserve–Guided Revascularization Strategy

CH Kim, B-K Koo, H-M Dehbi et al. Keywords: clinical outcome; fractional flow reserve; instantaneous wave-free ratio; gender difference

ABSTRACT


OBJECTIVES - This study sought to evaluate sex differences in procedural characteristics and clinical outcomes of instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR)and fractional flow reserve (FFR)guided revascularization strategies.

 

BACKGROUND - An iFR-guided strategy has shown a lower revascularization rate than an FFR-guided strategy, without differences in clinical outcomes.

 

METHODS - This is a post hoc analysis of the DEFINE-FLAIR (Functional Lesion Assessment of Intermediate stenosis to guide Revascularization) study, in which 601 women and 1,891 men were randomized to iFR- or FFR-guided strategy. The primary endpoint was 1-year major adverse cardiac events (MACE), a composite of all-cause death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or unplanned revascularization.

 

RESULTS - Among the entire population, women had a lower number of functionally significant lesions per patient (0.31 ± 0.51 vs. 0.43 ± 0.59; p < 0.001) and less frequently underwent revascularization than men (42.1% vs. 53.1%; p < 0.001). There was no difference in mean iFR value according to sex (0.91 ± 0.09 vs. 0.91 ± 0.10; p = 0.442). However, the mean FFR value was lower in men than in women (0.83 ± 0.09 vs. 0.85 ± 0.10; p = 0.001). In men, an FFR-guided strategy was associated with a higher rate of revascularization than an iFR-guided strategy (57.1% vs. 49.3%; p = 0.001), but this difference was not observed in women (41.4% vs. 42.6%; p = 0.757). There was no difference in MACE rates between iFR- and FFR-guided strategies in both women (5.4% vs. 5.6%, adjusted hazard ratio: 1.10; 95% confidence interval: 0.50 to 2.43; p = 0.805) and men (6.6% vs. 7.0%, adjusted hazard ratio: 0.98; 95% confidence interval: 0.66 to 1.46; p = 0.919).

 

CONCLUSIONS - An FFR-guided strategy was associated with a higher rate of revascularization than iFR-guided strategy in men, but not in women. However, iFR- and FFR-guided strategies showed comparable clinical outcomes, regardless of sex. (Functional Lesion Assessment of Intermediate Stenosis to guide Revascularization [DEFINE-FLAIR]; NCT02053038)