European Heart Journal Advance Access originally published online on September 1, 2005
European Heart Journal 2005 26(24):2623-2629; doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehi484
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
One-year outcome of patients submitted to routine fractional flow reserve assessment to determine the need for angioplasty
Department of Cardiology, EA 3920, University Hospital Jean-Minjoz, Boulevard Fleming, 25030 Besancon Cedex, France
Received 3 June 2005; revised 11 July 2005; accepted 11 August 2005; online publish-ahead-of-print 1 September 2005.
* Corresponding author. Tel: +33 381 66 85 39; fax: +33 381 66 85 82. E-mail address: francois.schiele{at}ufc-chu.univ-fcomte.fr
Aims In patients submitted to coronary angiography, fractional flow reserve (FFR) assessment by a pressure wire can be used to guide the decision for revascularization. Routine application of FFR assessment and 1-year outcome of patients are poorly documented. The aim of this study was to report a 4-year single-centre experience where the use of FFR for decision making in equivocal lesions is encouraged.
Methods and results A prospective registry was designed to collect clinical and angiographic characteristics, as well as 1-year clinical follow-up for all patients submitted to FFR assessment. The decisional cut-off point for revascularization was 0.80. Over a 4-year period, out of 6415 coronary angiographies, FFR was measured in 407 (6.3%) patients (469 lesions). FFR was assessed through 4 or 5 Fr diagnostic catheters in 330 (81%). Median FFR value was 0.87 (0.80; 0.93). On the basis of FFR results, 271 (67%) patients were treated with medical therapy alone. A subset of 71 (17%) patients were not treated in accordance with the results of FFR. All patients but four (i.e. 99%) had 1-year clinical follow-up. Three hundred and forty four (85%) were free from clinical event, six (1.5%) patients died, five (4%) had an acute coronary syndrome, and 20 (5%) underwent target-vessel revascularization. Event-free survival was comparable in patients with vs. without revascularization (0.94±0.02 and 0.93±0.01, respectively). Patients had significantly better 1-year outcome when treated in accordance with the results of the FFR assessment.
Conclusion In routine practice, FFR assessment during diagnostic angiography was performed in 6.3%. On the basis of FFR, two-thirds of patients with ‘intermediate’ lesions were left unrevascularized, with a favourable outcome, when FFR was above 0.80. These data suggest that routine use of FFR during diagnostic catheterization is feasible, safe, and provide help to guide decision making.
Key Words: Coronary angioplasty • Fractional flow reserve • Stent
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  W. B. Meijboom, C. A.G. Van Mieghem, N. van Pelt, A. Weustink, F. Pugliese, N. R. Mollet, E. Boersma, E. Regar, R. J. van Geuns, P. J. de Jaegere, et al. Comprehensive Assessment of Coronary Artery Stenoses: Computed Tomography Coronary Angiography Versus Conventional Coronary Angiography and Correlation With Fractional Flow Reserve in Patients With Stable Angina J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., August 19, 2008; 52(8): 636 - 643. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 P. Meimoun, T. Benali, F. Elmkies, S. Sayah, A. Luycx-Bore, L. Doutrelan, Z. Hamdane, J. Boulanger, and C. Tribouilloy Prognostic value of transthoracic coronary flow reserve in medically treated patients with proximal left anterior descending artery stenosis of intermediate severity Eur J Echocardiogr, June 25, 2008; (2008) jen190v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
N. H.J. Pijls, P. van Schaardenburgh, G. Manoharan, E. Boersma, J.-W. Bech, M. van't Veer, F. Bar, J. Hoorntje, J. Koolen, W. Wijns, et al. Percutaneous Coronary Intervention of Functionally Nonsignificant Stenosis: 5-Year Follow-Up of the DEFER Study J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., May 29, 2007; 49(21): 2105 - 2111. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. Tobis, B. Azarbal, and L. Slavin Assessment of Intermediate Severity Coronary Lesions in the Catheterization Laboratory J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., February 27, 2007; 49(8): 839 - 848. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|