Suppr超能文献

定量血流比与血流储备分数指导经皮冠状动脉介入治疗:随机 FAVOR III 欧洲日本试验的设计和原理。

Quantitative flow ratio versus fractional flow reserve for guiding percutaneous coronary intervention: design and rationale of the randomised FAVOR III Europe Japan trial.

机构信息

Department of Cardiology, Aarhus University Hospital, Skejby, Denmark.

Cardiology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria di Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy and Maria Cecilia Hospital, GVM Care & Research, Cotignola (RA), Italy.

出版信息

EuroIntervention. 2023 Apr 3;18(16):e1358-e1364. doi: 10.4244/EIJ-D-21-00214.

Abstract

Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) is a computation of fractional flow reserve (FFR) based on invasive coronary angiographic images. Calculating QFR is less invasive than measuring FFR and may be associated with lower costs. Current evidence supports the call for an adequately powered randomised comparison of QFR and FFR for the evaluation of intermediate coronary stenosis. The aim of the FAVOR III Europe Japan trial is to investigate if a QFR-based diagnostic strategy yields a non-inferior 12-month clinical outcome compared with a standard FFR-guided strategy in the evaluation of patients with intermediary coronary stenosis. FAVOR III Europe Japan is an investigator-initiated, randomised, clinical outcome, non-inferiority trial scheduled to randomise 2,000 patients with either 1) stable angina pectoris and intermediate coronary stenosis, or 2) indications for functional assessment of at least 1 non-culprit lesion after acute myocardial infarction. Up to 40 international centres will randomise patients to either a QFR-based or a standard FFR-based diagnostic strategy. The primary endpoint of major adverse cardiovascular events is a composite of all-cause mortality, any myocardial infarction, and any unplanned coronary revascularisation at 12 months. QFR could emerge as an adenosine- and wire-free alternative to FFR, making the functional evaluation of intermediary coronary stenosis less invasive and more cost-effective.

摘要

定量血流比(QFR)是一种基于有创冠状动脉造影图像计算的血流储备分数(FFR)。与测量 FFR 相比,计算 QFR 的侵入性更小,并且可能与更低的成本相关。目前的证据支持呼吁进行一项充分有力的 QFR 与 FFR 随机比较,以评估中间冠状动脉狭窄。FAVOR III 欧洲-日本试验的目的是研究基于 QFR 的诊断策略是否在评估中间冠状动脉狭窄的患者中与标准 FFR 指导策略相比产生非劣效的 12 个月临床结局。FAVOR III 欧洲-日本是一项由研究者发起的、随机的、临床结局、非劣效性试验,计划随机分配 2000 例患者,其中 1)稳定型心绞痛和中间冠状动脉狭窄,或 2)急性心肌梗死后至少有 1 个非罪犯病变需要进行功能评估的指征。多达 40 个国际中心将随机分配患者至 QFR 或标准 FFR 诊断策略。主要心血管不良事件的主要终点是 12 个月时全因死亡率、任何心肌梗死和任何未经计划的冠状动脉血运重建的复合终点。QFR 可能成为一种无腺苷和无导丝的 FFR 替代方法,使中间冠状动脉狭窄的功能评估更具侵入性和更具成本效益。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验