+ Site Statistics
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Fractional flow reserve versus angiography in guiding management to optimize outcomes in non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (FAMOUS-NSTEMI): rationale and design of a randomized controlled clinical trial



Fractional flow reserve versus angiography in guiding management to optimize outcomes in non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (FAMOUS-NSTEMI): rationale and design of a randomized controlled clinical trial



American Heart Journal 166(4): 662-668.E3



In patients with acute non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), coronary arteriography is usually recommended; but visual interpretation of the angiogram is subjective. We hypothesized that functional assessment of coronary stenosis severity with a pressure-sensitive guide wire (fractional flow reserve [FFR]) would have additive diagnostic, clinical, and health economic utility as compared with angiography-guided standard care. A prospective multicenter parallel-group 1:1 randomized controlled superiority trial in 350 NSTEMI patients with ≥1 coronary stenosis ≥30% severity (threshold for FFR measurement) will be conducted. Patients will be randomized immediately after coronary angiography to the FFR-guided group or angiography-guided group. All patients will then undergo FFR measurement in all vessels with a coronary stenosis ≥30% severity including culprit and nonculprit lesions. Fractional flow reserve will be disclosed to guide treatment in the FFR-guided group but not disclosed in the "angiography-guided" group. In the FFR-guided group, an FFR ≤0.80 will be an indication for revascularization by percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass surgery, as appropriate. The primary outcome is the between-group difference in the proportion of patients allocated to medical management only compared with revascularization. Secondary outcomes include the occurrence of cardiac death or hospitalization for myocardial infarction or heart failure, quality of life, and health care costs. The minimum and average follow-up periods for the primary analysis are 6 and 18 months, respectively. Our developmental clinical trial will address the feasibility of FFR measurement in NSTEMI and the influence of FFR disclosure on treatment decisions and health and economic outcomes.

Please choose payment method:






(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 053294253

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 24093845

DOI: 10.1016/j.ahj.2013.07.011


Related references

Fractional flow reserve vs. angiography in guiding management to optimize outcomes in non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: the British Heart Foundation FAMOUS-NSTEMI randomized trial. European Heart Journal 36(2): 100-111, 2015

Fractional flow reserve (FFR) versus angiography in guiding management to optimise outcomes in non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (FAMOUS-NSTEMI) developmental trial: cost-effectiveness using a mixed trial- and model-based methods. Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation 13: 19, 2015

Efficacy and safety outcomes of fractional flow reserve in guiding clinical therapy of non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction compared with angiography alone in elderly Chinese patients. Clinical Interventions in Aging 11: 1751-1754, 2016

Fractional flow reserve in unstable angina and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction experience from the FAME (Fractional flow reserve versus Angiography for Multivessel Evaluation) study. Jacc. Cardiovascular Interventions 4(11): 1183-1189, 2011

Thrombus Aspiration in ST-Elevation myocardial infarction in Scandinavia (TASTE trial). A multicenter, prospective, randomized, controlled clinical registry trial based on the Swedish angiography and angioplasty registry (SCAAR) platform. Study design and rationale. American Heart Journal 160(6): 1042-1048, 2010

Optimal timing of invasive angiography in stable non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction: the Leipzig Immediate versus early and late PercutaneouS coronary Intervention triAl in NSTEMI (LIPSIA-NSTEMI Trial). European Heart Journal 33(16): 2035-2043, 2012

Comparison of Fractional FLow Reserve And Intravascular ultrasound-guided Intervention Strategy for Clinical OUtcomes in Patients with InteRmediate Stenosis (FLAVOUR): Rationale and design of a randomized clinical trial. American Heart Journal 199: 7, 2018

Design and rationale of low-dose erythropoietin in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (EPO-AMI-II study): a randomized controlled clinical trial. Cardiovascular Drugs and Therapy 26(5): 409-416, 2012

Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio versus Fractional Flow Reserve guided intervention (iFR-SWEDEHEART): Rationale and design of a multicenter, prospective, registry-based randomized clinical trial. American Heart Journal 170(5): 945-950, 2015

Rationale and design of a double-blind, multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial of early administration of intravenous β-blockers in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction before primary percutaneous coronary intervention: EARLY β-blocker administration before primary PCI in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction trial. American Heart Journal 168(5): 661-666, 2014

Clinical Outcomes and Cost-Effectiveness of Fractional Flow Reserve-Guided Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With Stable Coronary Artery Disease: Three-Year Follow-Up of the FAME 2 Trial (Fractional Flow Reserve Versus Angiography for Multivessel Evaluation). Circulation 137(5): 480-487, 2018

Rationale and design of the Fractional Flow Reserve versus Angiography for Multivessel Evaluation (FAME) 3 Trial: a comparison of fractional flow reserve-guided percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass graft surgery in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease. American Heart Journal 170(4): 619-626.E2, 2015

Rationale and design of the fractional flow reserve versus angiography. 2007

Design and rationale of the COMPARE-ACUTE trial: Fractional flow reserve-guided primary multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention to improve guideline indexed actual standard of care for treatment of ST-elevation myocardial infarction in patients with multivessel coronary disease. American Heart Journal 186: 21-28, 2017

Fractional flow reserve versus angiography for guiding percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease: 2-year follow-up of the FAME (Fractional Flow Reserve Versus Angiography for Multivessel Evaluation) study. Journal of the American College of Cardiology 56(3): 177-184, 2010