Document Detail

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.
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  25179764     Owner:  NLM     Status:  Publisher    
AIM: We assessed the management and outcomes of non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) patients randomly assigned to fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guided management or angiography-guided standard care.
METHODS AND RESULTS: We conducted a prospective, multicentre, parallel group, 1 : 1 randomized, controlled trial in 350 NSTEMI patients with ≥1 coronary stenosis ≥30% of the lumen diameter assessed visually (threshold for FFR measurement) (NCT01764334). Enrolment took place in six UK hospitals from October 2011 to May 2013. Fractional flow reserve was disclosed to the operator in the FFR-guided group (n = 176). Fractional flow reserve was measured but not disclosed in the angiography-guided group (n = 174). Fractional flow reserve ≤0.80 was an indication for revascularization by percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG). The median (IQR) time from the index episode of myocardial ischaemia to angiography was 3 (2, 5) days. For the primary outcome, the proportion of patients treated initially by medical therapy was higher in the FFR-guided group than in the angiography-guided group [40 (22.7%) vs. 23 (13.2%), difference 95% (95% CI: 1.4%, 17.7%), P = 0.022]. Fractional flow reserve disclosure resulted in a change in treatment between medical therapy, PCI or CABG in 38 (21.6%) patients. At 12 months, revascularization remained lower in the FFR-guided group [79.0 vs. 86.8%, difference 7.8% (-0.2%, 15.8%), P = 0.054]. There were no statistically significant differences in health outcomes and quality of life between the groups.
CONCLUSION: In NSTEMI patients, angiography-guided management was associated with higher rates of coronary revascularization compared with FFR-guided management. A larger trial is necessary to assess health outcomes and cost-effectiveness.
Jamie Layland; Keith G Oldroyd; Nick Curzen; Arvind Sood; Kanarath Balachandran; Raj Das; Shahid Junejo; Nadeem Ahmed; Matthew M Y Lee; Aadil Shaukat; Anna O'Donnell; Julian Nam; Andrew Briggs; Robert Henderson; Alex McConnachie; Colin Berry;
Related Documents :
12963184 - Repair of left ventricular aneurysm: surgical risk and long-term survival.
22168634 - Aspects of psychodynamic neuropsychiatry iv: love, ripe fruit, and other addictions.
2592974 - Two techniques for the assessment of line bisection in visuo-spatial neglect: a single ...
25179764 - Fractional flow reserve vs. angiography in guiding management to optimize outcomes in n...
25341274 - Ischemic mitral regurgitation in patients with acute myocardial infarction.
2462244 - The automatic implantable cardioverter defibrillator: t wave sensing in the newest gene...
Publication Detail:
Type:  JOURNAL ARTICLE     Date:  2014-9-1
Journal Detail:
Title:  European heart journal     Volume:  -     ISSN:  1522-9645     ISO Abbreviation:  Eur. Heart J.     Publication Date:  2014 Sep 
Date Detail:
Created Date:  2014-9-2     Completed Date:  -     Revised Date:  -    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  8006263     Medline TA:  Eur Heart J     Country:  -    
Other Details:
Languages:  ENG     Pagination:  -     Citation Subset:  -    
Copyright Information:
© The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine

Previous Document:  Management of venous thrombo-embolism: an update.
Next Document:  EuroEco (European Health Economic Trial on Home Monitoring in ICD Patients): a provider perspective ...