In order to bring you the best possible user experience, this site uses Javascript. If you are seeing this message, it is likely that the Javascript option in your browser is disabled. For optimal viewing of this site, please ensure that Javascript is enabled for your browser.


This content is currently on FREE ACCESS, enjoy another 101 days of free consultation

 

Percutaneous coronary intervention versus medical therapy for coronary lesions with positive fractional flow reserve (FFR) but preserved coronary flow reserve (CFR). A substudy of the COMPARE-ACUTE

Session Assessment of residual risk after percutaneous coronary intervention

Speaker Joost Haeck

Congress : ESC Congress 2019

  • Topic : coronary artery disease, acute coronary syndromes, acute cardiac care
  • Sub-topic : Coronary Circulation, Flow, and Flow Reserve
  • Session type : Moderated Posters
  • FP Number : P1251

Authors : JD Haeck (Leeuwarden,NL), FM Zimmermann (Eindhoven,NL), M Van 'T Veer (Eindhoven,NL), FJ Neumann (Bad Krozingen,DE), AS Triantafyllis (Athens,GR), M Abdel-Wahab (Bad Segeberg,DE), E Omerovic (Gothenburg,SE), BM Boxma-De Klerk (Rotterdam,NL), NH Pijls (Eindhoven,NL), G Richardt (Bad Segeberg,DE), PA Tonino (Eindhoven,NL), NP Johnson (Houston,US), PC Smits (Rotterdam,NL)

Authors:
JD Haeck1 , FM Zimmermann2 , M Van 'T Veer2 , FJ Neumann3 , AS Triantafyllis4 , M Abdel-Wahab5 , E Omerovic6 , BM Boxma-De Klerk7 , NH Pijls2 , G Richardt5 , PA Tonino2 , NP Johnson8 , PC Smits7 , 1Medical Center Leeuwarden, Cardiology - Leeuwarden - Netherlands (The) , 2Catharina Hospital, Cardiology - Eindhoven - Netherlands (The) , 3University Heart Center Freiburg-Bad Krozingen, Cardiology - Bad Krozingen - Germany , 4Asklepeion General Hospital, Cardiology - Athens - Greece , 5Heart Center Bad Segeberg - Bad Segeberg - Germany , 6University of Gothenburg, Cardiology - Gothenburg - Sweden , 7Maasstad Hospital, Cardiology - Rotterdam - Netherlands (The) , 8McGovern Medical School at UTHealth, Medicine - Houston - United States of America ,

Citation:

Introduction

International guidelines recommend performing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) on stable coronary lesions with a positive fractional flow reserve (FFR) to improve clinical outcomes. It remains unclear if FFR positive lesions with preserved coronary flow reserved (CFR) might be better treated medically.

Purpose

This study compared clinical outcomes between PCI and medical therapy for stable FFR-positive lesions with preserved CFR.

Methods

We performed a substudy of the randomized, multicenter COMPARE-ACUTE trial in which treated ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients with stable non-culprit lesions were randomized to either FFR-guided PCI or medical therapy. Based on baseline and hyperaemic pressure gradients, we computed the so-called pressure bounded-CFR (pb-CFR) and classified lesions as low (<2) or preserved (=2). Our primary end point was a composite of death from any cause, non-fatal myocardial infarction, revascularization, or cerebrovascular events (MACCE) at 12 months.

Results

A total of 980 lesions from 885 subjects were included in this sub-study due to availability of baseline and hyperaemic pressure gradients. For the 462 lesions with FFR=0.80, 249 had a pb-CFR<2 while 29 had a preserved CFR (pb-CFR=2). The rate of MACCE at 1 year did not differ significantly between subjects with FFR=0.80 and pb-CFR<2 versus FFR=0.80 and pb-CFR=2 (24% vs. 30%, p=0.44). Because of randomization, baseline characteristics were well balanced between subjects with FFR=0.80 and pb-CFR=2 who were treated by PCI or medical therapy. Importantly for subjects with FFR=0.80 and pb-CFR=2, MACCE occurred more frequently when treated medically compared with PCI (50% vs. 0% respectively, p=0.01).

Conclusions

In this post-hoc substudy from a large randomized controlled trial of 885 subjects with 980 lesions, a preserved pb-CFR=2 did not associate with an improved clinical outcome when FFR=0.80. Subjects with FFR-positive coronary lesions but a preserved pb-CFR experienced significantly worse clinical outcomes when treated medically instead of with PCI. These data suggest that a stenosis with a FFR=0.80, even when pb-CFR remains preserved, benefits from treatment with PCI.

This content is currently on FREE ACCESS, enjoy another 101 days of free consultation

 



Based on your interests

Three reasons why you should become a member

Become a member now
  • 1Access your congress resources all year-round on the New ESC 365
  • 2Get a discount on your next congress registration
  • 3Continue your professional development with free access to educational tools
Become a member now

Our sponsors

ESC 365 is supported by Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim and Lilly Alliance, Bristol-Myers Squibb and Pfizer Alliance, Novartis Pharma AG and Vifor Pharma in the form of educational grants. The sponsors were not involved in the development of this platform and had no influence on its content.

logo esc

Our mission: To reduce the burden of cardiovascular disease

Who we are