Wolfrum Mathias, Fahrni Gregor, de Maria Giovanni Luigi, Knapp Guido, Curzen Nick, Kharbanda Rajesh K, Fröhlich Georg M, Banning Adrian P
Oxford Heart Centre, Oxford University Hospitals, Headley Way, Oxford, OX39DU, UK.
Department of Statistics, TU University Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany.
BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2016 Sep 8;16(1):177. doi: 10.1186/s12872-016-0355-7.
FFR is routinely used to guide percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI). Visual assessment of the angiographic result after PCI has limited efficacy. Even when the angiographic result seems satisfactory FFR after a PCI might be useful for identifying patients with a suboptimal interventional result and higher risk for poor clinical outcome who might benefit from additional procedures. The aim of this meta-analysis was to investigate available data of studies that examined clinical outcomes of patients with impaired vs. satisfactory fractional flow reserve (FFR) after percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI).
This meta-analysis was carried out according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews. The Mantel-Haenszel method using the fixed-effect meta-analysis model was used for combining the results. Studies were identified by searching the literature through mid-January, 2016, using the following search terms: fractional flow reserve, coronary circulation, after, percutaneous coronary intervention, balloon angioplasty, stent implantation, and stenting. Primary endpoint was the rate of major adverse cardiac events (MACE). Secondary endpoints included rates of death, myocardial infarction (MI), repeated revascularisation.
Eight relevant studies were found including a total of 1337 patients. Of those, 492 (36.8 %) had an impaired FFR after PCI, and 853 (63.2 %) had a satisfactory FFR after PCI. Odds ratios indicated that a low FFR following PCI was associated with an impaired outcome: major adverse cardiac events (MACE, OR: 4.95, 95 % confidence interval [CI]: 3.39-7.22, p <0.001); death (OR: 3.23, 95 % CI: 1.19-8.76, p = 0.022); myocardial infarction (OR: 13.83, 95 % CI: 4.75-40.24, p <0.0001) and repeated revascularisation (OR: 4.42, 95 % CI: 2.73-7.15, p <0.0001).
Compared to a satisfactory FFR, a persistently low FFR following PCI is associated with a worse clinical outcome. Prospective studies are needed to identify underlying causes, determine an optimal threshold for post-PCI FFR, and clarify whether simple additional procedures can influence the post-PCI FFR and clinical outcome.
血流储备分数(FFR)常用于指导经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)。PCI术后血管造影结果的视觉评估效果有限。即使血管造影结果看似令人满意,PCI术后的FFR对于识别介入效果欠佳且临床预后不良风险较高、可能从额外治疗中获益的患者仍可能有用。本荟萃分析的目的是调查经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)后血流储备分数(FFR)受损与满意的患者临床结局研究的现有数据。
本荟萃分析按照Cochrane系统评价手册进行。采用固定效应荟萃分析模型的Mantel-Haenszel方法合并结果。通过检索截至2016年1月中旬的文献来确定研究,检索词如下:血流储备分数、冠状动脉循环、PCI后、经皮冠状动脉介入治疗、球囊血管成形术、支架植入和支架置入术。主要终点是主要不良心脏事件(MACE)发生率。次要终点包括死亡率、心肌梗死(MI)率、再次血运重建率。
共找到8项相关研究,包括1337例患者。其中,492例(36.8%)PCI术后FFR受损,853例(63.2%)PCI术后FFR满意。比值比表明,PCI术后低FFR与不良结局相关:主要不良心脏事件(MACE,比值比:4.95,95%置信区间[CI]:3.39 - 7.22,p <0.001);死亡(比值比:3.23,95% CI:1.19 - 8.76,p = 0.022);心肌梗死(比值比:13.83,95% CI:4.75 - 40.24,p <0.0001)和再次血运重建(比值比:4.42,95% CI:2.73 - 7.15,p <0.0001)。
与FFR满意相比,PCI术后持续低FFR与更差的临床结局相关。需要进行前瞻性研究以确定潜在原因,确定PCI术后FFR的最佳阈值,并阐明简单的额外治疗是否会影响PCI术后FFR和临床结局。