We have located links that may give you full text access.
Clinical effects of physiologic lesion testing in influencing treatment strategy for multi-vessel coronary artery disease.
BACKGROUND: The application of fractional flow reserve (FFR) and instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) in multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD) patients has not been definitively explored. We herein assessed how treatment strategies were decided based on FFR/iFR values in vessels selected clinically. Specifically, we sought to determine whether treatment selection was based on whether the vessel tested was the clinical target stenosis.
METHODS: 270 consecutive patients with angiographically determined multivessel disease who underwent FFR/iFR testing were included. Patients were classified initially based on their angiographic findings, then re-evaluated from FFR/iFR results (normal or abnormal). Tested lesions were classified into target or non-target lesions based on clinical and non-invasive evaluations.
RESULTS: Abnormal FFR/iFR values were demonstrated in 51.9 % of patients, in whom 51.4 % received coronary stenting (PCI) and 44.3 % had bypass surgery (CABG). With two-vessel CAD patients, medical therapy was preferred when the target lesion was normal (72.6 %), while PCI was preferred when it was abnormal (78.4 %). In non-target lesions, PCI was preferred regardless of FFR/iFR results (78.0 %). With three-vessel CAD patients, CABG was preferred when the target lesion was abnormal (68.5 %), and there was no difference in the selected modality when it was normal. Furthermore, the incidence of tested lesions was higher in the left anterior descending (LAD) compared to other coronary arteries, and two-vessel CAD patients with LAD stenoses were more frequently treated by PCI.
CONCLUSION: The use of invasive physiologic testing in multivessel CAD patients may alter the preferred treatment strategy, leading to an overall increase in PCI selection.
METHODS: 270 consecutive patients with angiographically determined multivessel disease who underwent FFR/iFR testing were included. Patients were classified initially based on their angiographic findings, then re-evaluated from FFR/iFR results (normal or abnormal). Tested lesions were classified into target or non-target lesions based on clinical and non-invasive evaluations.
RESULTS: Abnormal FFR/iFR values were demonstrated in 51.9 % of patients, in whom 51.4 % received coronary stenting (PCI) and 44.3 % had bypass surgery (CABG). With two-vessel CAD patients, medical therapy was preferred when the target lesion was normal (72.6 %), while PCI was preferred when it was abnormal (78.4 %). In non-target lesions, PCI was preferred regardless of FFR/iFR results (78.0 %). With three-vessel CAD patients, CABG was preferred when the target lesion was abnormal (68.5 %), and there was no difference in the selected modality when it was normal. Furthermore, the incidence of tested lesions was higher in the left anterior descending (LAD) compared to other coronary arteries, and two-vessel CAD patients with LAD stenoses were more frequently treated by PCI.
CONCLUSION: The use of invasive physiologic testing in multivessel CAD patients may alter the preferred treatment strategy, leading to an overall increase in PCI selection.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Executive Summary: State-of-the-Art Review: Unintended Consequences: Risk of Opportunistic Infections Associated with Long-term Glucocorticoid Therapies in Adults.Clinical Infectious Diseases 2024 April 11
Clinical practice guidelines on the management of status epilepticus in adults: A systematic review.Epilepsia 2024 April 13
Autoimmune Hemolytic Anemias: Classifications, Pathophysiology, Diagnoses and Management.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 13
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app