Krivickas Žilvinas, Barauskas Mindaugas, Jodka Nojus, Žiubrytė Greta, Pranevičius Robertas, Unikas Ramūnas
Department of Cardiology, Hospital of Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, Kaunas, Lithuania.
Institute of Cardiology, Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, Kaunas, Lithuania.
Med Sci Monit. 2025 Jun 15;31:e948085. doi: 10.12659/MSM.948085.
BACKGROUND Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) is a non-invasive angiographic tool that provides functional assessment of coronary stenosis without the need for pressure wires or hyperemia. This prospective study aimed to evaluate the procedural and inpatient treatment outcomes of QFR-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) compared with that of angiography-guided PCI in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing staged revascularization of non-culprit lesions. MATERIAL AND METHODS This randomized prospective single-center study was conducted at the Hospital of the Lithuanian University of Health Sciences Kaunas Clinics (July 2020-June 2021). After successful culprit-lesion PCI for STEMI, 124 participants with residual angiographically significant non-culprit stenosis (50-75%) were randomized to QFR-guided (n=62) or angiography-guided PCI (n=62). Procedural characteristics, fluoroscopy time, contrast usage, stent number/length, and inpatient treatment outcomes were compared between groups using SPSS 28.0 software. RESULTS Compared with PCI guided by visual estimation alone, the QFR-guided PCI group showed significant reductions in fluoroscopy time (median 6.2 vs 8.0 min, P=0.009), contrast volume (median 100 vs 120 mL, P=0.038), number of stents implanted (median 1.5 vs 2.0, P=0.002), and stent length (median 28 vs 45 mm, P<0.001). No significant differences were found between the groups in terms of periprocedural complications or length of inpatient stay. CONCLUSIONS QFR-guided PCI of the non-culprit lesion resulted in shorter fluoroscopy time, lower contrast volume, and a smaller number and average length of implanted stents. These findings highlight the potential of QFR to enhance procedural efficiency and reduce unnecessary stenting in clinical practice without compromising patient outcomes.
定量血流比(QFR)是一种非侵入性血管造影工具,无需压力导丝或充血即可对冠状动脉狭窄进行功能评估。本前瞻性研究旨在评估在接受非罪犯病变分期血运重建的ST段抬高型心肌梗死(STEMI)患者中,与血管造影引导的经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)相比,QFR引导的PCI的手术及住院治疗结果。
本随机前瞻性单中心研究在立陶宛卫生科学大学考纳斯临床医院进行(2020年7月至2021年6月)。在成功对STEMI罪犯病变进行PCI后,124例残留血管造影显示有意义的非罪犯狭窄(50%-75%)的参与者被随机分为QFR引导组(n=62)或血管造影引导PCI组(n=62)。使用SPSS 28.0软件比较两组的手术特征、透视时间、造影剂用量、支架数量/长度及住院治疗结果。
与单纯视觉评估引导的PCI相比,QFR引导的PCI组在透视时间(中位数6.2 vs 8.0分钟,P=0.009)、造影剂用量(中位数100 vs 120 mL,P=0.038)、植入支架数量(中位数1.5 vs 2.0,P=0.002)和支架长度(中位数28 vs 45 mm,P<0.001)方面均显著降低。两组在围手术期并发症或住院时间方面未发现显著差异。
非罪犯病变的QFR引导PCI导致透视时间更短、造影剂用量更低,且植入支架的数量和平均长度更小。这些发现凸显了QFR在不影响患者预后的情况下提高临床实践中手术效率和减少不必要支架置入的潜力。