Fearon William F, Tonino Pim A L, De Bruyne Bernard, Siebert Uwe, Pijls Nico H J
Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
Am Heart J. 2007 Oct;154(4):632-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2007.06.012.
Although its limitations for diagnosing critical coronary artery disease are well described, coronary angiography remains the predominant method for guiding decisions about stent implantation in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease. However, some have suggested that invasive physiologic guidance may improve decision making.
The objective of this multicenter, randomized clinical trial is to compare the efficacy of 2 strategies, one based on angiographic guidance to one based on physiologic guidance with fractional flow reserve (FFR), for deciding which coronary lesions to stent in patients with multivessel coronary disease. Eligible patients must have coronary narrowings > 50% diameter stenosis in > or = 2 major epicardial vessels, > or = 2 of which the investigator feels require drug-eluting stent placement. Patients with previous coronary bypass surgery or left main coronary disease are excluded. Based on angiographic evaluation, the investigator notes the lesions that require stenting. The patient is then randomly assigned to either angiographic guidance or FFR guidance. Patients assigned to angiographic guidance undergo stenting as planned. Patients assigned to FFR guidance first have FFR measured in each diseased vessel and only undergo stenting if the FFR is < or = 0.80. The primary end point of the study is a composite of major adverse cardiac events, including death, myocardial infarction, and repeat coronary revascularization, at 1 year. Secondary end points will include the individual adverse events, cost-effectiveness, quality of life, and 30-day, 6-month, 2-year, and 5-year outcomes.
The FAME study will examine for the first time in a large, multicenter, randomized fashion the role of measuring FFR in patients undergoing multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention.
尽管冠状动脉造影在诊断严重冠状动脉疾病方面的局限性已得到充分描述,但它仍是指导多支冠状动脉疾病患者进行支架植入决策的主要方法。然而,一些人认为侵入性生理指标指导可能会改善决策。
这项多中心随机临床试验的目的是比较两种策略的疗效,一种基于血管造影指导,另一种基于血流储备分数(FFR)的生理指标指导,用于决定多支冠状动脉疾病患者中哪些冠状动脉病变需要植入支架。符合条件的患者必须在≥2支主要心外膜血管中存在直径狭窄>50%的冠状动脉狭窄,其中≥2处病变研究者认为需要植入药物洗脱支架。既往有冠状动脉搭桥手术史或左主干冠状动脉疾病患者被排除。基于血管造影评估,研究者记录需要植入支架的病变。然后将患者随机分配至血管造影指导组或FFR指导组。分配至血管造影指导组的患者按计划进行支架植入。分配至FFR指导组的患者首先在每支病变血管中测量FFR,只有当FFR≤0.80时才进行支架植入。研究的主要终点是1年时主要不良心脏事件的复合终点,包括死亡、心肌梗死和再次冠状动脉血运重建。次要终点将包括个体不良事件、成本效益、生活质量以及30天、6个月、2年和5年的结局。
FAME研究将首次以大型、多中心、随机的方式研究在接受多支经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的患者中测量FFR的作用。