+ 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

Angiography Versus Hemodynamics to Predict the Natural History of Coronary Stenoses: Fractional Flow Reserve Versus Angiography in Multivessel Evaluation 2 Substudy



Angiography Versus Hemodynamics to Predict the Natural History of Coronary Stenoses: Fractional Flow Reserve Versus Angiography in Multivessel Evaluation 2 Substudy



Circulation 137(14): 1475-1485



Among patients with documented stable coronary artery disease and in whom no revascularization was performed, we compared the respective values of angiographic diameter stenosis (DS) and fractional flow reserve (FFR) in predicting natural history. The present analysis included the 607 patients from the FAME 2 trial (Fractional Flow Reserve Versus Angiography in Multivessel Evaluation 2) in whom no revascularization was performed. FFR varied from 0.20 to 1.00 (average 0.74±0.16), and DS (by quantitative coronary analysis) varied from 8% to 98% (average 53±15). The primary end point, defined as vessel-oriented clinical end point (VOCE) at 2 years, was a composite of prospectively adjudicated cardiac death, vessel-related myocardial infarction, vessel-related urgent, and not urgent revascularization. The stenoses were divided into 4 groups according to FFR and %DS values: positive concordance (FFR≤0.80; DS≥50%), negative concordance (FFR>0.80; DS<50%), positive mismatch (FFR≤0.80; DS<50%), and negative mismatch (FFR>0.80; DS≥50%). The rate of VOCE was highest in the positive concordance group (log rank: X2=80.96; P=0.001) and lowest in the negative concordance group. The rate of VOCE was higher in the positive mismatch group than in the negative mismatch group (hazard ratio, 0.38; 95% confidence interval, 0.21-0.67; P=0.001). There was no significant difference in VOCE between the positive concordance and positive mismatch groups (FFR≤0.80; hazard ratio, 0.77; 95% confidence interval, 0.57-1.09; P=0.149) and no significant difference in rate of VOCE between the negative mismatch and negative concordance groups (FFR>0.80; hazard ratio, 1.89; 95% confidence interval, 0.96-3.74; P=0.067). In patients with stable coronary disease, physiology (FFR) is a more important determinant of the natural history of coronary stenoses than anatomy (DS). URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01132495.

Please choose payment method:






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

Accession: 059365364

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 29162610

DOI: 10.1161/circulationaha.117.028782


Related references

Angiographic versus functional severity of coronary artery stenoses in the FAME study fractional flow reserve versus angiography in multivessel evaluation. Journal of the American College of Cardiology 55(25): 2816-2821, 2010

The impact of sex differences on fractional flow reserve-guided percutaneous coronary intervention: a FAME (Fractional Flow Reserve Versus Angiography for Multivessel Evaluation) substudy. Jacc. Cardiovascular Interventions 5(10): 1037-1042, 2012

The impact of age on fractional flow reserve-guided percutaneous coronary intervention: a FAME (Fractional Flow Reserve versus Angiography for Multivessel Evaluation) trial substudy. International Journal of Cardiology 177(1): 66-70, 2014

Comprehensive assessment of coronary artery stenoses: computed tomography coronary angiography versus conventional coronary angiography and correlation with fractional flow reserve in patients with stable angina. Journal of the American College of Cardiology 52(8): 636-643, 2008

Diagnostic performance of quantitative coronary computed tomography angiography and quantitative coronary angiography to predict hemodynamic significance of intermediate-grade stenoses. International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging 31(8): 1651-1661, 2015

Comparison Between Non-invasive (Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography Derived) and Invasive-Fractional Flow Reserve in Patients with Serial Stenoses Within One Coronary Artery: A NXT Trial substudy. Annals of Biomedical Engineering 44(2): 580-589, 2016

Quantitative computed tomographic coronary angiography: does it predict functionally significant coronary stenoses?. Circulation. Cardiovascular Imaging 7(1): 43-51, 2014

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

Determination of the severity of coronary stenoses in man correlation of angiography and hemodynamics. American Heart Association Monograph (82): IV-108, 1981

Comparison of the degree of coronary stenoses by multidetector computed tomography versus by quantitative coronary angiography. American Journal of Cardiology 96(6): 784-787, 2005

Standard versus user-interactive assessment of significant coronary stenoses with multislice computed tomography coronary angiography. American Journal of Cardiology 94(12): 1590-1593, 2004

Hemodynamics of multiple versus single 50 percent coronary arterial stenoses. American Journal of Cardiology 50(2): 276-280, 1982

Assessment of coronary arterial stenoses postintervention by quantitative angiography versus intracoronary ultrasound in 13 patients undergoing balloon and or laser coronary angioplasty. Journal of the American College of Cardiology 17(2 Suppl. A): 46A, 1991

Exercise induced changes in platelet aggregability predict the presence or absence of flow-limiting stenoses at coronary angiography. Circulation 104(17 Suppl.): II 484, 2001

Sixty-four slice spiral CT angiography does not predict the functional relevance of coronary artery stenoses in patients with stable angina. European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging 34(1): 4-10, 2007