CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Left Atrial Appendage Closure versus Non-Warfarin Oral Anticoagulation in Atrial Fibrillation: 4-Year Outcomes of PRAGUE-17 Frailty and Clinical Outcomes of Direct Oral Anticoagulants Versus Warfarin in Older Adults With Atrial Fibrillation: A Cohort Study Patent Foramen Ovale Attributable Cryptogenic Embolism With Thrombophilia Has Higher Risk for Recurrence and Responds to Closure Alcohol consumption, cardiac biomarkers, and risk of atrial fibrillation and adverse outcomes Role of endothelial dysfunction in determining angina after percutaneous coronary intervention: Learning from pathophysiology to optimize treatment Stretch-induced sarcoplasmic reticulum calcium leak is causatively associated with atrial fibrillation in pressure-overloaded hearts Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Represents an Anti-Inflammatory Therapy Via Reduction of Shear Stress-Induced, Piezo-1-Mediated Monocyte Activation Systematic Review and Network Meta‐Analysis Comparing Bifurcation Techniques for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Potential Candidates for Transcatheter Tricuspid Valve Intervention After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Predictors and Prognosis Residual Shunt After Patent Foramen Ovale Closure and Long-Term Stroke Recurrence: A Prospective Cohort Study

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)