Angiography-Based Physiology to Guide Coronary Revascularization.
Summary
Angiography-Based Physiology to Guide Coronary Revascularization. Original Article Abstract Background Current society guidelines recommend physiological assessment of intermediate coronary lesions to guide revascularization. Data regarding revascularization guided by vessel fractional flow reserve (vFFR), derived from three-dimensional quantitative coronary angiography without the need for a pressure wire or hyperemic agent, as compared with pressure-wire-based fractional flow reserve (F
Content
# Angiography-Based Physiology to Guide Coronary Revascularization.
*Original Article*
# Abstract
## Background
Current society guidelines recommend physiological assessment of
intermediate coronary lesions to guide revascularization. Data regarding
revascularization guided by vessel fractional flow reserve (vFFR), derived from
three-dimensional quantitative coronary angiography without the need for a
pressure wire or hyperemic agent, as compared with pressure-wire-based
fractional flow reserve (FFR), are lacking.
## Methods
We conducted an international, open-label, randomized, noninferiority
trial at 37 sites in Europe. Patients with intermediate coronary-artery lesions
(diameter stenosis of 30 to 80%) who presented with chronic or acute coronary
syndromes were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to undergo either vFFR-guided or
FFR-guided revascularization of the intermediate coronary-artery lesions. The
primary end point was a composite of death from any cause, any myocardial
infarction, or any revascularization at 1 year. The noninferiority margin was
3.0 percentage points.
## Results
The primary end point was assessed in 1116 patients in the vFFR group
and 1095 in the FFR group. The mean age of the patients was 67 years, 24.3% were
women, 18.7% presented with an acute coronary syndrome, and 26.6% had diabetes
mellitus. At 1 year, a primary end-point event had occurred in 80 patients
(Kaplan-Meier estimate, 7.5%) in the vFFR group and in 79 patients (Kaplan-Meier
estimate, 7.5%) in the FFR group (risk difference, -0.02 percentage points; 95%
confidence interval, -2.25 to 2.21; Pā=ā0.004 for noninferiority). The incidence
of serious adverse events appeared to be similar in the two groups.
## Conclusions
Among patients with intermediate coronary lesions, vFFR-guided
revascularization was noninferior to FFR-guided revascularization with respect
to a composite of death, myocardial infarction, or revascularization at 1 year.
(Funded by Pie Medical Imaging and Siemens Healthineers; FAST III
ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04931771.).
---
DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2601841