Angiographic quantitative flow ratio-guided coronary intervention (FAVOR III China): a multicentre, randomised, sham-controlled trial.
Peking Union Medical College1, Shanghai Jiao Tong University2, Capital Medical University3, Harbin Medical University4, Zhejiang University5, Chinese PLA General Hospital6, Fujian Medical University7, Fudan University8, Tongji University9, Peking University10, Xuzhou Medical College11, Hunan Normal University12, Complutense University of Madrid13, VA Palo Alto Healthcare System14, NewYork–Presbyterian Hospital15, National University of Ireland, Galway16, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai17
TL;DR: The FAVOR III China trial as mentioned in this paper showed that a QFR-guided strategy of lesion selection for percutaneous coronary intervention improved 1-year clinical outcomes compared with standard angiography guidance.
About: This article is published in The Lancet.The article was published on 2021-11-04 and is currently open access. It has received 84 citations till now. The article focuses on the topics: Conventional PCI & Acute coronary syndrome.
Citations
More filters
••
TL;DR: In this paper , the authors explore the history, research hotspots, and emerging trends of drug-eluting stents (DES) in the last two decades from the perspective of structural and temporal dynamics.
13 citations
••
TL;DR: In this paper , the authors summarized the current evidence related to angiography-based fractional flow reserve (FFR) derivation and perspectives on future developments, and provided a comprehensive overview of the current literature.
Abstract: Three-dimensional quantitative coronary angiography-based methods of fractional flow reserve (FFR) derivation have emerged as an appealing alternative to conventional pressure-wire-based physiological lesion assessment and have the potential to further extend the use of physiology in general. Here, we summarize the current evidence related to angiography-based FFR and perspectives on future developments.Growing evidence suggests good diagnostic performance of angiography-based FFR measurements, both in chronic and acute coronary syndromes, as well as in specific lesion subsets, such as long and calcified lesions, left main coronary stenosis, and bifurcations. More recently, promising results on the superiority of angiography-based FFR as compared to angiography-guided PCI have been published. Currently available angiography -FFR indices proved to be an excellent alternative to invasive pressure wire-based FFR. Dedicated prospective outcome data comparing these indices to routine guideline recommended PCI including the use of FFR are eagerly awaited.
9 citations
••
TL;DR: The angiography-derived index of microvascular resistance has emerged as a promising surrogate in pilot studies, however, more data are needed to validate and compare the diagnostic and prognostic accuracy of different equations as well as to illustrate the relationship between angiographic-derived parameters for epicardial coronary arteries and those for the microvasculature.
Abstract: ABSTRACT Introduction Non-obstructive coronary arteries (NOCA) are present in 39.7% to 62.4% of patients who undergo elective angiography. Coronary microcirculation (<400 µm) is not visible on angiography therefore functional assessment, invasive or noninvasive plays a prior role to help provide a more personalized diagnosis of angina. Area covered In this review, we revisit the pathophysiology, clinical importance, and invasive assessment of the coronary microcirculation, and discuss angiography-derived indices of microvascular resistance. A comprehensive literature review over four decades is also undertaken. Expert opinion The coronary microvasculature plays an important role in flow autoregulation and metabolic regulation. Invasive assessment of microvascular resistance is a validated modality with independent prognostic value, nevertheless, its routine application is hampered by the requirement of intravascular instrumentation and hyperemic agents. The angiography-derived index of microvascular resistance has emerged as a promising surrogate in pilot studies, however, more data are needed to validate and compare the diagnostic and prognostic accuracy of different equations as well as to illustrate the relationship between angiography-derived parameters for epicardial coronary arteries and those for the microvasculature.
7 citations
••
TL;DR: In this paper , the authors propose a method for quantifying quantification.quantify quantify quantified quantification, quantification quantifier, quantifyquantification quantify.
Abstract: quantify
6 citations
••
TL;DR: In this article , the diagnostic performance of contrast flow and fixed flow (fQFR) QFR against the NHPR resting full-cyle ratio (RFR) using FFR as reference standard was investigated.
5 citations
References
More filters
••
TL;DR: Authors/Task Force Members: Franz-Josef Neumann* (ESC Chairperson) (Germany), Miguel Sousa-Uva* (EACTS Chair person) (Portugal), Anders Ahlsson (Sweden), Fernando Alfonso (Spain), Adrian P. Banning (UK), Umberto Benedetto (UK).
4,342 citations
••
TL;DR: Routine measurement of FFR in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease who are undergoing PCI with drug-eluting stents significantly reduces the rate of the composite end point of death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and repeat revascularization at 1 year.
Abstract: Background In patients with multivessel coronary artery disease who are undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), coronary angiography is the standard method for guiding the placement of the stent. It is unclear whether routine measurement of fractional flow reserve (FFR; the ratio of maximal blood flow in a stenotic artery to normal maximal flow), in addition to angiography, improves outcomes. Methods In 20 medical centers in the United States and Europe, we randomly assigned 1005 patients with multivessel coronary artery disease to undergo PCI with implantation of drug-eluting stents guided by angiography alone or guided by FFR measurements in addition to angiography. Before randomization, lesions requiring PCI were identified on the basis of their angiographic appearance. Patients assigned to angiography-guided PCI underwent stenting of all indicated lesions, whereas those assigned to FFR-guided PCI underwent stenting of indicated lesions only if the FFR was 0.80 or less. The primary end point was the rate of death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and repeat revascularization at 1 year. Results The mean (±SD) number of indicated lesions per patient was 2.7±0.9 in the angiography group and 2.8±1.0 in the FFR group (P = 0.34). The number of stents used per patient was 2.7±1.2 and 1.9±1.3, respectively (P<0.001). The 1-year event rate was 18.3% (91 patients) in the angiography group and 13.2% (67 patients) in the FFR group (P = 0.02). Seventy-eight percent of the patients in the angiography group were free from angina at 1 year, as compared with 81% of patients in the FFR group (P = 0.20). Conclusions Routine measurement of FFR in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease who are undergoing PCI with drug-eluting stents significantly reduces the rate of the composite end point of death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and repeat revascularization at 1 year. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00267774.)
3,479 citations
••
TL;DR: In patients with stable coronary artery disease and functionally significant stenoses, FFR-guided PCI plus the best available medical therapy, as compared with the best Available medical therapy alone, decreased the need for urgent revascularization.
Abstract: A b s t r ac t Background The preferred initial treatment for patients with stable coronary artery disease is the best available medical therapy. We hypothesized that in patients with functionally significant stenoses, as determined by measurement of fractional flow reserve (FFR), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) plus the best available medical therapy would be superior to the best available medical therapy alone. Methods In patients with stable coronary artery disease for whom PCI was being considered, we assessed all stenoses by measuring FFR. Patients in whom at least one stenosis was functionally significant (FFR, ≤0.80) were randomly assigned to FFR-guided PCI plus the best available medical therapy (PCI group) or the best available medical therapy alone (medical-therapy group). Patients in whom all stenoses had an FFR of more than 0.80 were entered into a registry and received the best available medical therapy. The primary end point was a composite of death, myocardial infarction, or urgent revascularization. Results Recruitment was halted prematurely after enrollment of 1220 patients (888 who underwent randomization and 332 enrolled in the registry) because of a significant between-group difference in the percentage of patients who had a primary endpoint event: 4.3% in the PCI group and 12.7% in the medical-therapy group (hazard ratio with PCI, 0.32; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.19 to 0.53; P<0.001). The difference was driven by a lower rate of urgent revascularization in the PCI group than in the medical-therapy group (1.6% vs. 11.1%; hazard ratio, 0.13; 95% CI, 0.06 to 0.30; P<0.001); in particular, in the PCI group, fewer urgent revascularizations were triggered by a myocardial infarction or evidence of ischemia on electrocardiography (hazard ratio, 0.13; 95% CI, 0.04 to 0.43; P<0.001). Among patients in the registry, 3.0% had a primary end-point event. Conclusions In patients with stable coronary artery disease and functionally significant stenoses, FFR-guided PCI plus the best available medical therapy, as compared with the best available medical therapy alone, decreased the need for urgent revascularization. In patients without ischemia, the outcome appeared to be favorable with the best available medical therapy alone. (Funded by St. Jude Medical; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01132495.)
2,195 citations
••
Stanford University1, New York University2, Duke University3, Boston University4, Saint Louis University5, Imperial College London6, Northwick Park Hospital7, Hospital Universitario La Paz8, Durham University9, NewYork–Presbyterian Hospital10, Albany Medical College11, St. Michael's Hospital12, Montreal Heart Institute13, Auckland City Hospital14, All India Institute of Medical Sciences15, University of British Columbia16, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center17, Harvard University18, Brigham and Women's Hospital19, Columbia University Medical Center20, Saint Francis University21, University of Missouri–Kansas City22, Government Medical College, Thiruvananthapuram23, Sri Jayadeva Institute of Cardiovascular Sciences and Research24, University of São Paulo25, Emory University26, Veterans Health Administration27, Mayo Clinic28, Semmelweis University29, Flinders Medical Centre30, Université Paris-Saclay31, Uppsala University Hospital32, Uppsala University33, Keio University34, National Institutes of Health35, Vanderbilt University36, East Carolina University37, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai38
TL;DR: Evidence that an initial invasive strategy, as compared with an initial conservative strategy, reduced the risk of ischemic cardiovascular events or death from any cause over a median of 3.2 years is not found.
Abstract: Background Among patients with stable coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia, whether clinical outcomes are better in those who receive an invasive intervention plus medical ther...
1,324 citations
••
1,061 citations