Elguindy Mostafa, Stables Rod, Nicholas Zoe, Kemp Ian, Curzen Nick
From the Institute of Cardiovascular Medicine and Science, London, United Kingdom (M.E., R.S., I.K.); Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, United Kingdom (M.E., R.S., I.K.); Wessex Cardiothoracic Centre, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, United Kingdom (Z.N., N.C.); and Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, United Kingdom (N.C.).
Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2018 Feb;11(2):e004191. doi: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.117.004191.
Investigation of anginal chest pain has traditionally involved either assessment of the coronary anatomy by angiography or noninvasive testing for reversible ischemia. Invasive pressure wire assessment at the time of angiography offers information on both anatomy and physiology. Fractional flow reserve-guided percutaneous coronary intervention is associated with lower resource utilization and improved clinical outcome compared with angiographic guidance alone. However, the value of routine fractional flow reserve of all major coronary vessels at the time of diagnostic angiography has not been established in a randomized trial despite persuasive observational data. A change in practice to routine fractional flow reserve assessment of all major vessels during diagnostic angiography would require evidence not just of clinical benefit but also of cost effectiveness. This randomized trial aims to test that strategy.
RIPCORD 2 (Does Routine Pressure Wire Assessment Influence Management Strategy at Coronary Angiography for Diagnosis of Chest Pain?) is an 1100 patient prospective, multicenter, randomized trial. Participants are randomized, after initial coronary angiography, and in equal proportion, to assessment and management according to (1) conventional angiography only or (2) additional routine pressure wire assessment in all epicardial vessels of sufficient size to be amenable to revascularization. The primary economic outcome measure will be a comparison of healthcare costs at 1 year. The primary quality-of-life outcome measure analysis will compare patient-reported quality-of-life scores at 1 year. Secondary outcome measures include clinical events at 1 year, management strategy (optimal medical therapy with or without revascularization), and angina status at 1 year according to Canadian Cardiovascular Society angina grade.
The aim of the RIPCORD 2 trial is to assess whether a strategy of routine fractional flow reserve-guided assessment and management of all major coronary arteries will be associated with more effective resource utilization, improved quality of life, and better clinical outcome, compared with angiographic guidance alone.
URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT02892903.
传统上,对心绞痛性胸痛的研究包括通过血管造影评估冠状动脉解剖结构或进行可逆性缺血的无创检测。血管造影时进行有创压力导丝评估可提供解剖学和生理学两方面的信息。与单纯血管造影引导相比,血流储备分数引导的经皮冠状动脉介入治疗可降低资源利用并改善临床结局。然而,尽管有说服力的观察性数据,但在诊断性血管造影时对所有主要冠状动脉进行常规血流储备分数评估的价值尚未在随机试验中得到证实。将诊断性血管造影时所有主要血管的常规血流储备分数评估纳入实践,不仅需要有临床获益的证据,还需要有成本效益的证据。这项随机试验旨在验证该策略。
RIPCORD 2(常规压力导丝评估是否会影响冠状动脉造影诊断胸痛时的管理策略?)是一项纳入1100例患者的前瞻性、多中心随机试验。参与者在初始冠状动脉造影后,按相等比例随机分为两组,分别根据以下方式进行评估和管理:(1)仅进行传统血管造影,或(2)对所有足够大、适合血运重建的心外膜血管进行额外的常规压力导丝评估。主要经济结局指标将是比较1年时的医疗保健成本。主要生活质量结局指标分析将比较患者报告的1年时生活质量评分。次要结局指标包括1年时的临床事件、管理策略(有无血运重建的最佳药物治疗)以及根据加拿大心血管学会心绞痛分级的1年时心绞痛状态。
RIPCORD 2试验的目的是评估与单纯血管造影引导相比,对所有主要冠状动脉进行常规血流储备分数引导的评估和管理策略是否会带来更有效的资源利用、改善生活质量以及更好的临床结局。