Deferred vs. performed revascularization for coronary stenosis with grey-zone fractional flow reserve values: data from the IRIS-FFR registry

The optimal fractional flow reserve (FFR) cut-off value for revascularization is debated. We evaluated the prognosis for deferred and performed revascularization in coronary stenosis with FFR values in the grey zone (0.75–0.80).

This study included 1334 native coronary stenosis with grey-zone FFR values in 1334 patients from the prospective multicentre Interventional Cardiology Research In-cooperation Society Fractional Flow Reserve registry. Revascularization was deferred for 683 patients (deferred group) and performed for 651 (performed group). The primary outcome, a composite of death, target-vessel myocardial infarction (MI), and target vessel revascularization (TVR) occurred in 55 (8.1%) patients in the deferred group and 55 (8.4%) in the performed group [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 1.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.67–1.66; P = 0.79] during a median follow-up of 2.9 years (interquartile range 1.5–4.1 years). Overall mortality and spontaneous MI did not differ between the groups (mortality 2.5% vs. 2.0%; aHR 0.82, 95% CI 0.34–2.00; P = 0.66; spontaneous MI 0.7% vs. 0.5%; aHR 1.85, 95% CI 0.35–9.75; P = 0.47). Myocardial infarction was significantly higher in the performed group (0.7% vs. 3.2%; aHR 0.27, 95% CI 0.09–0.80; P = 0.02) mainly because of a higher risk of periprocedural MI. Target vessel revascularization was significantly higher in the deferred group (5.7% vs. 3.7%; aHR 2.17, 95% CI 1.17–4.02; P = 0.01).

For coronary stenosis with grey-zone FFR, revascularization was not associated with better clinical outcomes. The higher likelihood of periprocedural MI with revascularization was offset by the higher likelihood of TVR with deferral.

Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01366404.