Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Non-randomized comparison between revascularization and deferral for intermediate coronary stenosis with abnormal fractional flow reserve and preserved coronary flow reserve
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Non-randomized comparison between revascularization and deferral for intermediate coronary stenosis with abnormal fractional flow reserve and preserved coronary flow reserve
Do you wish to request the book?
Non-randomized comparison between revascularization and deferral for intermediate coronary stenosis with abnormal fractional flow reserve and preserved coronary flow reserve
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Non-randomized comparison between revascularization and deferral for intermediate coronary stenosis with abnormal fractional flow reserve and preserved coronary flow reserve
2021
Overview
Limited data are available regarding comparative prognosis after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) versus deferral of revascularization in patients with intermediate stenosis with abnormal fractional flow reserve (FFR) but preserved coronary flow reserve (CFR). From the International Collaboration of Comprehensive Physiologic Assessment Registry (NCT03690713), a total of 330 patients (338 vessels) who had coronary stenosis with FFR ≤ 0.80 but CFR > 2.0 were selected for the current analysis. Patient-level clinical outcome was assessed by major adverse cardiac events (MACE) at 5 years, a composite of all-cause death, target-vessel myocardial infarction (MI), or target-vessel revascularization. Among the study population, 231 patients (233 vessels) underwent PCI and 99 patients (105 vessels) were deferred. During 5 years of follow-up, cumulative incidence of MACE was 13.0% (31 patients) without significant difference between PCI and deferred groups (12.7% vs. 14.0%, adjusted HR 1.301, 95% CI 0.611–2.769,
P
= 0.495). Multiple sensitivity analyses by propensity score matching and inverse probability weighting also showed no significant difference in patient-level MACE and vessel-specific MI or revascularization. In this hypothesis-generating study, there was no significant difference in clinical outcomes between PCI and deferred groups among patients with intermediate stenosis with FFR ≤ 0.80 but CFR > 2.0. Further study is needed to confirm this finding.
Clinical Trial Registration: International Collaboration of Comprehensive Physiologic Assessment Registry (NCT03690713; registration date: 10/01/2018).
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC,Nature Publishing Group UK,Nature Publishing Group,Nature Portfolio
Subject
/ Aged
/ Cardiovascular Diseases - etiology
/ Coronary Stenosis - complications
/ Coronary Stenosis - pathology
/ Female
/ Fractional Flow Reserve, Myocardial
/ Humanities and Social Sciences
/ Humans
/ Male
/ Medicine
/ Myocardial Infarction - etiology
/ NCT
/ Patients
/ Percutaneous Coronary Intervention
/ Q
/ R
/ Science
/ Stenosis
/ Stents
