Changes in surgical revascularization strategy after fractional flow reserve.

AIMS: In the randomized GRAFFITI trial, surgeons drew their strategy based on coronary angiography. When patients were randomized to fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guidance, surgeons were informed of the FFR values and asked to redraw their strategy. The aim of this study was to investigate the changes induced by FFR knowledge. METHODS AND RESULTS: The intended and performed strategy (before and after FFR) were compared. Among 172 patients, 84 with 300 lesions were randomized to the FFR-guided group. The intended strategy was to bypass 236 stenoses:108 with a venous and 128 with an arterial graft. After disclosing FFR, a change in strategy occurred in 64 lesions (21.3%) of 48 (55%) patients. Among 64 lesions for which the intended strategy was medical therapy, 16 (25%) were bypassed after disclosing FFR. The number of procedures with >1 venous graft planned was significantly reduced from 37 to 27 patients (p = .031). The proportion of on-pump surgery was significantly reduced from 71 to 61 patients (p = .006). The rates of clinical events at 1 year were similar between patients with or without at least one change in strategy. DISCUSSION: FFR-guided CABG is associated with a simplified surgical procedure in 55% of the patients, with similar clinical outcomes.

Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting or Fractional Flow Reserve-Guided Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Diabetic Patients With Multivessel Disease.

BACKGROUND: In diabetic patients with multivessel coronary artery disease, coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) has shown long-term benefits over percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Physiology-guided PCI has shown to improve clinical outcomes in multivessel coronary artery disease, though its impact in diabetic patients has never been investigated. We evaluated long-term clinical outcomes of diabetic patients with multivessel coronary artery disease treated with fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guided PCI compared with CABG. METHODS: From 2010 to 2018, 4622 diabetic patients undergoing coronary angiography were screened for inclusion. The inclusion criterion was the presence of at least 2-vessel disease defined as with diameter stenosis ≥50%, in which at least 1 intermediate stenosis (diameter stenosis, 30%-70%) was treated or deferred according to FFR. Inverse probability of treatment weighting analysis was used to account for baseline differences with a contemporary cohort of patients treated with CABG. The primary end point was major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events, defined as all-cause death, myocardial infarction, revascularization, or stroke. RESULTS: A total of 418 patients were included in the analysis. Among them, 209 patients underwent CABG and 209 FFR-guided PCI. At 5 years, the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events was higher in the FFR-guided PCI versus the CABG group (44.5% versus 31.9%; hazard ratio, 1.60 [95% CI, 1.15-2.22]; P=0.005). No difference was found in the composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or stroke (28.8% versus 27.5%; hazard ratio, 1.05 [95% CI, 0.72-1.53]; P=0.81). Repeat revascularization was more frequent with FFR-guided PCI (24.9% versus 8.2%; hazard ratio, 3.51 [95% CI, 1.93-6.40]; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In diabetic patients with multivessel coronary artery disease, CABG was associated with a lower rate of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events compared with FFR-guided PCI, driven by a higher rate of repeat revascularization. At 5-year follow-up, no difference was observed in the composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or stroke between CABG and FFR-guided PCI. Graphic Abstract: A graphic abstract is available for this article.

Graft patency after FFR-guided versus angiography-guided coronary artery bypass grafting: the GRAFFITI trial.

AIMS: The aim of this study was to assess prospectively the clinical benefits of fractional flow reserve (FFR) in guiding coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). METHODS AND RESULTS: GRAFFITI is a single-blinded, prospective, multicentre, randomised controlled trial of FFR-guided versus angiography-guided CABG. We enrolled patients undergoing coronary angiography, having a significantly diseased left anterior descending artery or left main stem and at least one more major coronary artery with intermediate stenosis, assessed by FFR. Surgical strategy was defined based on angiography, blinded to FFR values prior to randomisation. After randomisation, patients were operated on either following the angiography-based strategy (angiography-guided group) or according to FFR, i.e., with an FFR ≤0.80 as cut-off for grafting (FFR-guided group). The primary endpoint was graft patency at 12 months. Between March 2012 and December 2016, 172 patients were randomised either to the angiography-guided group (84 patients) or to the FFR-guided group (88 patients). The patients had a median of three [3; 4] lesions; diameter stenosis was 65% (50%; 80%), FFR was 0.72 (0.50; 0.82). Compared to the angiography-guided group, the FFR-guided group received fewer anastomoses (3 [3; 3] vs 2 [2; 3], respectively; p=0.004). One-year angiographic follow-up showed no difference in overall graft patency (126 [80%] vs 113 [81%], respectively; p=0.885). One-year clinical follow-up, available in 98% of patients, showed no difference in the composite of death, myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularisation and stroke. CONCLUSIONS: FFR guidance of CABG has no impact on one-year graft patency, but it is associated with a simplified surgical procedure. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01810224.

Study Design of the Graft Patency After FFR-Guided Versus Angiography-Guided CABG Trial (GRAFFITI).

Clinical benefit of invasive functionally guided revascularization has been mostly investigated and proven for percutaneous coronary intervention. It has never been prospectively evaluated whether a systematic fractional flow reserve (FFR) assessment is also beneficial in guiding coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG). The objective of the GRAft patency after FFR-guided versus angiography-guIded CABG (GRAFFITI) trial was to compare an FFR-guided revascularization strategy to the traditional angiography-guided revascularization strategy for patients undergoing CABG. Patients were enrolled with significantly diseased left anterior descending or left main stem and at least one major coronary artery with angiographically intermediate stenosis (30-90% diameter stenosis) that was assessed by FFR. Thereafter, while the FFR values were kept concealed, cardiac surgeons decided their intended procedural strategy based on the coronary angiography alone. At this point, patients underwent 1:1 randomization to either an FFR-guided or an angiography-guided CABG strategy. In case the patient was randomized to angiography-guided arm, cardiac surgeons kept their intended procedural strategy, i.e., CABG was guided solely on the basis of the coronary angiography. In case the patient was randomized to the FFR-guided arm, FFR values were disclosed to the surgeons who revised the surgical protocol according to the functional significance of each coronary stenosis. The primary endpoint of the trial was the rate of graft occlusion at 12 months, assessed by coronary computed tomography or coronary angiography. The secondary endpoints were (1) length of postoperative hospital stay; (2) changes in surgical strategy depending upon FFR results (in FFR-guided group only); and (3) rate of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events, i.e., composite of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and any revascularization during the follow-up period. This study is the first prospective randomized trial investigating potential clinical benefits, associated with FFR-guided surgical revascularization. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01810224.