Clinical Events after Deferral of LAD Treatment Guided by FFR or iFR

iFR is a safe alternative for lesion deferral even when it comes to the left anterior descending artery (LAD). What is more, patients deferred with iFR showed significantly fewer events than patients deferred using FFR.

La performance diagnóstica del iFR hace temblar al FFRNeither clinical cardiologists nor interventionists feel comfortable deferring LAD treatment, because it is often perceived as high risk. If functional assessment is non-significant, they will look for an excuse to perform IVUS or any other thing to end up treating a lesion that, despite the angiography, is not ischemic.

 

Using the DEFINE-FLAIR (Functional Lesion Assessment of Intermediate Stenosis to Guide Revascularization) the authors describe when lesions are differed using invasive functional assessment using either fractional flow reserve (FFR) or instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR).


Read also: How long should we wait with asymptomatic aortic stenosis and preserved LVEF?


Combined major events rate (MACE) was compared at one year between patients whose LAD lesions had been deferred using FFR vs iFR. MACE was defined as a combination of cardiovascular death, acute myocardial infarction and unplanned revascularization. Both patients and physicians in charge of follow up were blinded to whether the decision was made based on FFR or iFR.

 

In all, 872 patients had angiographic LAD lesions: 421 guided by FFR and 451 guided by por iFR were deferred.


Read also: Safety in Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Surveillance Programs.


Events rate was significantly lower when using iFR compared against FFR (2.44% vs. 5.26%; HR: 0.46; CI 95%: 0.22 to 0.95; p=0.04). This was driven by significantly lower unplanned revascularization with iFR (2.22% iFR vs. 4.99% FFR, p=0.03) and lower infarction rate, non-significant, not numerically though (0.44% iFR vs. 2.14% FFR, p=0.06).

 

Original Title: Clinical Events After Deferral of LAD Revascularization Following Physiological Coronary Assessment.

Reference: Sayan Sen et al. J Am Coll Cardiol 2019;73:444–53.

 

444-abierto.full


Subscribe to our weekly newsletter

Get the latest scientific articles on interventional cardiology

We are interested in your opinion. Please, leave your comments, thoughts, questions, etc., below. They will be most welcome.

More articles by this author

Coronary Perforations and Use of Covered Stents: Safe and Effective Long-Term Strategy?

Coronary perforations remain one of the most serious complications of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), especially in cases of Ellis ruptures type III. In these...

Left Main Coronary Artery Disease: Intravascular Imaging-Guided PCI vs. Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting

Multiple randomized clinical trials have demonstrated superior outcomes with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) vs. percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with left main...

AHA 2025 | OCEAN Study: Anticoagulation vs. Antiplatelet Therapy After Successful Atrial Fibrillation Ablation

After a successful atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation, the need to maintain long-term anticoagulation (AC) remains uncertain, especially considering the very low residual embolic risk...

AHA 2025 | VESALIUS-CV: Evolocumab in High-Cardiovascular-Risk Patients Without Prior MI or Stroke

LDL cholesterol is a well-established factor for cardiovascular disease. Therapy with PCSK9 inhibitors, including evolocumab, has been shown to reduce the risk of cardiovascular...

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Related Articles

SOLACI Sessionsspot_img

Recent Articles

Coronary Perforations and Use of Covered Stents: Safe and Effective Long-Term Strategy?

Coronary perforations remain one of the most serious complications of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), especially in cases of Ellis ruptures type III. In these...

Is it really necessary to monitor all patients after TAVR?

Conduction disorders (CD) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are a frequent complication and may lead to the need for permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI)....

Is it really necessary to monitor all patients after TAVR?

Conduction disorders (CD) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are a frequent complication and may lead to the need for permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI)....