Background: There are limited real-world data on the clinical course of untreated coronary lesions according to their functional severity.

Objective: To evaluate the 5-year clinical outcomes of patients with revascularized lesions with fractional flow reserve (FFR) ≤ 0.8 and patients with non-revascularized lesions with FFR > 0.8.

Methods: The FFR assessment was performed in 218 patients followed for up to 5 years. Participants were classified based on FFR into ischemia group (≤ 0.8, intervention group, n = 55), low-normal FFR group (> 0.8-0.9, n = 91), and high-normal FFR group (> 0.9, n = 72). The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), a composite of death, myocardial infarction, and need for repeat revascularization. The significance level was set at 0.05; therefore, results with a p-value < 0.05 were considered statistically significant.

Results: Most patients were male (62.8%) with a mean age of 64.1 years. Diabetes was present in 27%. On coronary angiography, the severity of stenosis was 62% in the ischemia group, 56.4% in the low-normal FFR group, and 54.3% in the high-normal FFR group (p<0.05). Mean follow-up was 3.5 years. The incidence of MACEs was 25.5%, 13.2%, and 11.1%, respectively (p=0.037). MACE incidence did not differ significantly between the low-normal and high-normal FFR groups.

Conclusion: Patients with FFR indicative of ischemia had poorer outcomes than those in non-ischemia groups. There was no difference in the incidence of events between the low-normal and high-normal FFR groups. Long-term studies with a large sample size are needed to better assess cardiovascular outcomes in patients with moderate coronary stenosis with FFR values between 0.8 and 1.0.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10263408PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.36660/abc.20211051DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

ffr group
16
fractional flow
8
flow reserve
8
ffr
8
ischemia group
8
low-normal ffr
8
high-normal ffr
8
group
7
patients
5
prognostic assessment
4

Similar Publications

Coronary revascularisation deferral based on quantitative flow ratio or fractional flow reserve: a post hoc analysis of the FAVOR III Europe trial.

EuroIntervention

January 2025

Hospital Clínico San Carlos IDISSC, Complutense University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain and Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red - Enfermedades Cardiovasculares (CIBERCV), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain.

Background: Safe deferral of revascularisation is a key aspect of physiology-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). While recent evidence gathered in the FAVOR III Europe trial showed that quantitative flow ratio (QFR) guidance did not meet non-inferiority to fractional flow reserve (FFR) guidance, it remains unknown if QFR might have a specific value in revascularisation deferral.

Aims: We aimed to evaluate the safety of coronary revascularisation deferral based on QFR as compared with FFR.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background: Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS)-guided optimization of suboptimal fractional flow reserve (FFR) following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) results in a significant increase in both post-PCI FFR and minimal lumen and stent areas (MLA and MSA, respectively). However, the impact of clinical presentation with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) versus chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) on the efficacy of PCI optimization remains unknown.

Methods: This was a prespecified subgroup analysis of the FFR REACT trial comparing IVUS-guided PCI optimization versus no further treatment in 291 patients with a post-PCI FFR < 0.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background: In patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and multivessel coronary artery disease, the optimal management strategy for non-culprit lesions is a subject of ongoing debate. There has been an increasing use of physiology-guidance to assess the extent of occlusion in non-culprit lesions, and hence the need for stenting. Fractional flow reserve (FFR) is commonly used as a technique.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background: Fractional flow reserve (FFR) is crucial to evaluating coronary artery stenosis in patients diagnosed with chronic coronary syndrome (CCS). By assessing the severity of stenosis, FFR assists in determining whether percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is necessary.

Methods: Conducted at Tehran Heart Center from 2013 through 2017, this cohort study involved 52,248 CCS patients who underwent coronary angiography.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

This study investigated the clinical value of coronary arteriography (CAG) combined with fractional flow reserve (FFR) in the treatment of coronary heart disease (CHD) with coronary artery stenosis exceeding 70%. A retrospective analysis was conducted on 344 patients with CHD treated at the Gansu Institute of Cardiovascular Science from January 2020 to May 2022. The patients were divided into the CAG group (n = 138) and the CAG + FFR group (n = 206).

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!