Abstract

Aims A fractional flow reserve (FFR) value ≥0.90 after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is associated with a reduced risk of adverse cardiovascular events. TARGET-FFR is an investigator-initiated, single-centre, randomized controlled trial to determine the feasibility and efficacy of a post-PCI FFR-guided optimization strategy vs. standard coronary angiography in achieving final post-PCI FFR values ≥0.90.Methods and results After angiographically guided PCI, patients were randomized 1:1 to receive a physiology-guided incremental optimization strategy (PIOS) or a blinded coronary physiology assessment (control group). The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with a final post-PCI FFR ≥0.90. Final FFR ≤0.80 was a prioritized secondary outcome. A total of 260 patients were randomized (131 to PIOS, 129 to control) and 68.1% of patients had an initial post-PCI FFR <0.90. In the PIOS group, 30.5% underwent further intervention (stent post-dilation and/or additional stenting). There was no significant difference in the primary endpoint of the proportion of patients with final post-PCI FFR ≥0.90 between groups (PIOS minus control 10%, 95% confidence interval −1.84 to 21.91, P = 0.099). The proportion of patients with a final FFR ≤0.80 was significantly reduced when compared with the angiography-guided control group (−11.2%, 95% confidence interval −21.87 to −0.35], P = 0.045).Conclusion Over two-thirds of patients had a physiologically suboptimal result after angiography-guided PCI. An FFR-guided optimization strategy did not significantly increase the proportion of patients with a final FFR ≥0.90, but did reduce the proportion of patients with a final FFR ≤0.80.

Highlights

  • Fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), as compared with angiography-guided PCI, reduces unnecessary stenting and lowers the risk of myocardial infarction at 2 years.[1]

  • The utility of measuring FFR after PCI is less certain but post-PCI FFR values are reported to be inversely associated with adverse cardiac events.[2]

  • PCI is low; (ii) where this occurs, it is primarily related to residual diffuse disease in the vessel and, (iii) there is limited scope to improve the FFR result through further intervention

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), as compared with angiography-guided PCI, reduces unnecessary stenting and lowers the risk of myocardial infarction at 2 years.[1]. From previous reports, a post-PCI FFR that remains below the clinical threshold for revascularization (FFR _0.90 ranges from 21% to 100%.4–14 from previous reports, a post-PCI FFR that remains below the clinical threshold for revascularization (FFR

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call