Cargando…
Prospective Randomized Comparison of Fractional Flow Reserve Versus Optical Coherence Tomography to Guide Revascularization of Intermediate Coronary Stenoses: One‐Month Results
BACKGROUND: Fractional flow reserve (FFR) and optical coherence tomography (OCT) may help both in assessment and in percutaneous coronary intervention optimization of angiographically intermediate coronary lesions. We designed a prospective trial comparing the clinical and economic outcomes associat...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6761662/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31331219 http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.119.012772 |
_version_ | 1783454069444050944 |
---|---|
author | Leone, Antonio Maria Burzotta, Francesco Aurigemma, Cristina De Maria, Giovanni Luigi Zambrano, Aniello Zimbardo, Giuseppe Arioti, Manfredi Cerracchio, Emma Vergallo, Rocco Trani, Carlo Crea, Filippo |
author_facet | Leone, Antonio Maria Burzotta, Francesco Aurigemma, Cristina De Maria, Giovanni Luigi Zambrano, Aniello Zimbardo, Giuseppe Arioti, Manfredi Cerracchio, Emma Vergallo, Rocco Trani, Carlo Crea, Filippo |
author_sort | Leone, Antonio Maria |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Fractional flow reserve (FFR) and optical coherence tomography (OCT) may help both in assessment and in percutaneous coronary intervention optimization of angiographically intermediate coronary lesions. We designed a prospective trial comparing the clinical and economic outcomes associated with FFR or OCT in angiographically intermediate coronary lesions. METHODS AND RESULTS: Three hundred fifty patients with angiographically intermediate coronary lesions (n=446) were randomized to FFR or OCT guidance. In the FFR arm, percutaneous coronary intervention was performed if FFR was ≤0.80 aiming for a postprocedure FFR >0.90. In the OCT arm, percutaneous coronary intervention was performed if percentage of area stenosis was ≥75% or 50% to 75% with minimal lumen area <2.5 mm(2) or plaque ulceration. Costs, angina frequency, and major adverse cardiac events were assessed at 1 month and at 13 months. We present early data at 1 month consistent with a prespecified analysis of secondary end points. Patients randomized to FFR, as compared with OCT, were significantly more commonly managed with medical therapy alone (67.7% versus 41.1%; P<0.001), required less contrast media (245±137 versus 280±129 mL; P=0.004), and exhibited a lower occurrence of contrast‐induced acute kidney injury (1.7% versus 8.6%; P=0.034). At 1 month, in comparison to FFR, OCT was associated with increased total costs (2831±1288 versus 4292±3844 euros/patient; P<0.001) whereas occurrence of major adverse cardiac events or significant angina was similar. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with angiographically intermediate coronary lesions, a functional guidance by FFR, as compared with OCT, increased the rate of patients treated with medical therapy alone. This translated into a significant reduction in administered contrast, contrast‐induced acute kidney injury, and total costs at 1 month with FFR. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrialsgov. Unique identifier: NCT01824030. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6761662 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-67616622019-09-30 Prospective Randomized Comparison of Fractional Flow Reserve Versus Optical Coherence Tomography to Guide Revascularization of Intermediate Coronary Stenoses: One‐Month Results Leone, Antonio Maria Burzotta, Francesco Aurigemma, Cristina De Maria, Giovanni Luigi Zambrano, Aniello Zimbardo, Giuseppe Arioti, Manfredi Cerracchio, Emma Vergallo, Rocco Trani, Carlo Crea, Filippo J Am Heart Assoc Original Research BACKGROUND: Fractional flow reserve (FFR) and optical coherence tomography (OCT) may help both in assessment and in percutaneous coronary intervention optimization of angiographically intermediate coronary lesions. We designed a prospective trial comparing the clinical and economic outcomes associated with FFR or OCT in angiographically intermediate coronary lesions. METHODS AND RESULTS: Three hundred fifty patients with angiographically intermediate coronary lesions (n=446) were randomized to FFR or OCT guidance. In the FFR arm, percutaneous coronary intervention was performed if FFR was ≤0.80 aiming for a postprocedure FFR >0.90. In the OCT arm, percutaneous coronary intervention was performed if percentage of area stenosis was ≥75% or 50% to 75% with minimal lumen area <2.5 mm(2) or plaque ulceration. Costs, angina frequency, and major adverse cardiac events were assessed at 1 month and at 13 months. We present early data at 1 month consistent with a prespecified analysis of secondary end points. Patients randomized to FFR, as compared with OCT, were significantly more commonly managed with medical therapy alone (67.7% versus 41.1%; P<0.001), required less contrast media (245±137 versus 280±129 mL; P=0.004), and exhibited a lower occurrence of contrast‐induced acute kidney injury (1.7% versus 8.6%; P=0.034). At 1 month, in comparison to FFR, OCT was associated with increased total costs (2831±1288 versus 4292±3844 euros/patient; P<0.001) whereas occurrence of major adverse cardiac events or significant angina was similar. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with angiographically intermediate coronary lesions, a functional guidance by FFR, as compared with OCT, increased the rate of patients treated with medical therapy alone. This translated into a significant reduction in administered contrast, contrast‐induced acute kidney injury, and total costs at 1 month with FFR. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrialsgov. Unique identifier: NCT01824030. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-07-23 /pmc/articles/PMC6761662/ /pubmed/31331219 http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.119.012772 Text en © 2019 The Authors. Published on behalf of the American Heart Association, Inc., by Wiley. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made. |
spellingShingle | Original Research Leone, Antonio Maria Burzotta, Francesco Aurigemma, Cristina De Maria, Giovanni Luigi Zambrano, Aniello Zimbardo, Giuseppe Arioti, Manfredi Cerracchio, Emma Vergallo, Rocco Trani, Carlo Crea, Filippo Prospective Randomized Comparison of Fractional Flow Reserve Versus Optical Coherence Tomography to Guide Revascularization of Intermediate Coronary Stenoses: One‐Month Results |
title | Prospective Randomized Comparison of Fractional Flow Reserve Versus Optical Coherence Tomography to Guide Revascularization of Intermediate Coronary Stenoses: One‐Month Results |
title_full | Prospective Randomized Comparison of Fractional Flow Reserve Versus Optical Coherence Tomography to Guide Revascularization of Intermediate Coronary Stenoses: One‐Month Results |
title_fullStr | Prospective Randomized Comparison of Fractional Flow Reserve Versus Optical Coherence Tomography to Guide Revascularization of Intermediate Coronary Stenoses: One‐Month Results |
title_full_unstemmed | Prospective Randomized Comparison of Fractional Flow Reserve Versus Optical Coherence Tomography to Guide Revascularization of Intermediate Coronary Stenoses: One‐Month Results |
title_short | Prospective Randomized Comparison of Fractional Flow Reserve Versus Optical Coherence Tomography to Guide Revascularization of Intermediate Coronary Stenoses: One‐Month Results |
title_sort | prospective randomized comparison of fractional flow reserve versus optical coherence tomography to guide revascularization of intermediate coronary stenoses: one‐month results |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6761662/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31331219 http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.119.012772 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT leoneantoniomaria prospectiverandomizedcomparisonoffractionalflowreserveversusopticalcoherencetomographytoguiderevascularizationofintermediatecoronarystenosesonemonthresults AT burzottafrancesco prospectiverandomizedcomparisonoffractionalflowreserveversusopticalcoherencetomographytoguiderevascularizationofintermediatecoronarystenosesonemonthresults AT aurigemmacristina prospectiverandomizedcomparisonoffractionalflowreserveversusopticalcoherencetomographytoguiderevascularizationofintermediatecoronarystenosesonemonthresults AT demariagiovanniluigi prospectiverandomizedcomparisonoffractionalflowreserveversusopticalcoherencetomographytoguiderevascularizationofintermediatecoronarystenosesonemonthresults AT zambranoaniello prospectiverandomizedcomparisonoffractionalflowreserveversusopticalcoherencetomographytoguiderevascularizationofintermediatecoronarystenosesonemonthresults AT zimbardogiuseppe prospectiverandomizedcomparisonoffractionalflowreserveversusopticalcoherencetomographytoguiderevascularizationofintermediatecoronarystenosesonemonthresults AT ariotimanfredi prospectiverandomizedcomparisonoffractionalflowreserveversusopticalcoherencetomographytoguiderevascularizationofintermediatecoronarystenosesonemonthresults AT cerracchioemma prospectiverandomizedcomparisonoffractionalflowreserveversusopticalcoherencetomographytoguiderevascularizationofintermediatecoronarystenosesonemonthresults AT vergallorocco prospectiverandomizedcomparisonoffractionalflowreserveversusopticalcoherencetomographytoguiderevascularizationofintermediatecoronarystenosesonemonthresults AT tranicarlo prospectiverandomizedcomparisonoffractionalflowreserveversusopticalcoherencetomographytoguiderevascularizationofintermediatecoronarystenosesonemonthresults AT creafilippo prospectiverandomizedcomparisonoffractionalflowreserveversusopticalcoherencetomographytoguiderevascularizationofintermediatecoronarystenosesonemonthresults |