Suppr超能文献

FFR 和 CFR 联合评估在冠状动脉血运重建决策中的应用:来自多中心国际 ILIAS 注册研究。

Combined Assessment of FFR and CFR for Decision Making in Coronary Revascularization: From the Multicenter International ILIAS Registry.

机构信息

Department of Cardiology, Amsterdam UMC-Location AMC, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Department of Cardiology, Amsterdam UMC-Location VUmc, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Department of Cardiology, Noordwest Ziekenhuisgroep, Alkmaar, the Netherlands.

Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Heart Vascular Stroke Institute, Seoul, Korea.

出版信息

JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2022 May 23;15(10):1047-1056. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2022.03.016.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to demonstrate the clinical implications of combined assessment of fractional flow reserve (FFR) and coronary flow reserve (CFR).

BACKGROUND

Combined assessment of FFR and CFR allows detailed characterization of pathophysiology in chronic coronary syndromes. Data on the clinical implications of distinct FFR and CFR patterns are limited, leading to uncertainty regarding their relevance.

METHODS

Patients with chronic coronary syndromes and obstructive coronary artery disease were selected from the multicenter ILIAS (Inclusive Invasive Physiological Assessment in Angina Syndromes) registry. Patients were classified into 4 groups on the basis of FFR ≤0.80 and CFR <2.0. The endpoint was the 5-year target vessel failure (TVF) rate.

RESULTS

A total of 2,143 patients with 2,725 lesions were included. Compared with normal FFR/normal CFR, low FFR/low CFR carried the highest risk for TVF (HR: 5.4; 95% CI: 3.2-9.3; P < 0.001), significantly higher than in revascularized vessels (P = 0.007). Discordance, with either low FFR/normal CFR or normal FFR/low CFR, was associated with increased TVF rates compared with normal FFR/normal CFR (low FFR/normal CFR: HR: 3.5 [95% CI: 2.2-5.4; P < 0.001]; normal FFR/low CFR: HR: 3.0 [95% CI: 1.9-4.7; P < 0.001]). No difference in 5-year TVF was observed between the 2 discordant groups (P = 0.57) or between the discordant groups and the revascularized group (P = 0.26 vs low FFR/normal CFR; P = 0.60 vs normal FFR/low CFR).

CONCLUSIONS

Impaired coronary hemodynamics are uniformly associated with increased 5-year TVF rates. Nonrevascularized vessels with discordant FFR and CFR are associated with 5-year event rates that are equivalent to those of vessels that undergo revascularization, whereas vessels with combined low FFR and CFR exhibit event rates that are significantly higher than after revascularization. (Inclusive Invasive Physiological Assessment in Angina Syndromes Registry [ILIAS Registry]; NCT04485234).

摘要

目的

本研究旨在阐明血流储备分数(FFR)和冠状动脉血流储备(CFR)联合评估的临床意义。

背景

FFR 和 CFR 的联合评估可详细描述慢性冠状动脉综合征的病理生理学特征。FFR 和 CFR 不同模式的临床意义数据有限,导致其相关性存在不确定性。

方法

本研究从多中心 ILIAS(心绞痛综合征的包容性有创生理评估)注册研究中选择了慢性冠状动脉综合征合并阻塞性冠状动脉疾病患者。根据 FFR≤0.80 和 CFR<2.0 将患者分为 4 组。终点是 5 年靶血管失败(TVF)率。

结果

共纳入 2143 例患者的 2725 处病变。与正常 FFR/正常 CFR 相比,低 FFR/低 CFR 的 TVF 风险最高(HR:5.4;95%CI:3.2-9.3;P<0.001),明显高于血运重建血管(P=0.007)。FFR 与 CFR 不匹配(低 FFR/正常 CFR 或正常 FFR/低 CFR)与正常 FFR/正常 CFR 相比,TVF 发生率更高(低 FFR/正常 CFR:HR:3.5[95%CI:2.2-5.4;P<0.001];正常 FFR/低 CFR:HR:3.0[95%CI:1.9-4.7;P<0.001])。但在 2 个不匹配组之间(P=0.57)或不匹配组与血运重建组之间(与低 FFR/正常 CFR 相比,P=0.26;与正常 FFR/低 CFR 相比,P=0.60),5 年 TVF 无差异。

结论

冠状动脉血流动力学受损与 5 年 TVF 发生率增加一致相关。FFR 和 CFR 不匹配的非血运重建血管的 5 年事件发生率与血运重建血管相当,而同时存在低 FFR 和 CFR 的血管的事件发生率明显高于血运重建后。(包容性有创生理评估在心绞痛综合征中的应用注册研究[ILIAS 注册研究];NCT04485234)

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验