CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Inhibition of Platelet Aggregation After Coronary Stenting in Patients Receiving Oral Anticoagulation Feasibility and efficacy of the ultrashort side branch dedicated balloon in coronary bifurcation stenting Intravascular Imaging and 12-Month Mortality After Unprotected Left Main Stem PCI: An Analysis From the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society Database 10-Year Outcomes of Stents Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting for Left Main Coronary Artery Disease Bayesian Interpretation of the EXCEL Trial and Other Randomized Clinical Trials of Left Main Coronary Artery Revascularization Drug-eluting stent implantation in patients with acute coronary syndrome - the Activity of Platelets after Inhibition and Cardiovascular Events: Optical Coherence Tomography (APICE OCT) study Impact of Percutaneous Revascularization on Exercise Hemodynamics in Patients With Stable Coronary Disease Comprehensive Investigation of Circulating Biomarkers and their Causal Role in Atherosclerosis-related Risk Factors and Clinical Events Efficacy and safety of low-dose colchicine in patients with coronary disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials Antibody-Based Ticagrelor Reversal Agent in Healthy Volunteers

Clinical Trial2022 Mar, 79 (10) 965–974

JOURNAL:J Am Coll Cardiol. Article Link

5-Year Outcomes of PCI Guided by Measurement of Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio Versus Fractional Flow Reserve

M Götberg, K Berntorp, R Rylance et al. Keywords: iFR-guided vs. FFR-guided revascularization; RCT

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND - Instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) is a coronary physiology index used to assess the severity of coronary artery stenosis to guide revascularization. iFR has previously demonstrated noninferior short-term outcome compared to fractional flow reserve (FFR), but data on longer-term outcome have been lacking.


OBJECTIVES - The purpose of this study was to investigate the prespecified 5-year follow-up of the primary composite outcome of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, and unplanned revascularization of the iFR-SWEDEHEART trial comparing iFR vs FFR in patients with chronic and acute coronary syndromes.


METHODS - iFR-SWEDEHEART was a multicenter, controlled, open-label, registry-based randomized clinical trial using the Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry for enrollment. A total of 2,037 patients were randomized to undergo revascularization guided by iFR or FFR.


RESULTS - No patients were lost to follow-up. At 5 years, the rate of the primary composite endpoint was 21.5% in the iFR group and 19.9% in the FFR group (HR: 1.09; 95% CI: 0.90-1.33). The rates of all-cause death (9.4% vs 7.9%; HR: 1.20; 95% CI: 0.89-1.62), nonfatal myocardial infarction (5.7% vs 5.8%; HR: 1.00; 95% CI: 0.70-1.44), and unplanned revascularization (11.6% vs 11.3%; HR: 1.02; 95% CI: 0.79-1.32) were also not different between the 2 groups. The outcomes were consistent across prespecified subgroups.


CONCLUSIONS - In patients with chronic or acute coronary syndromes, an iFR-guided revascularization strategy was associated with no difference in the 5-year composite outcome of death, myocardial infarction, and unplanned revascularization compared with an FFR-guided revascularization strategy. (Evaluation of iFR vs FFR in Stable Angina or Acute Coronary Syndrome [iFR SWEDEHEART]; NCT02166736)