Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Long-term survival in patients undergoing percutaneous interventions with or without intracoronary pressure wire guidance or intracoronary ultrasonographic imaging: a large cohort study.
JAMA Intern Med ; 174(8): 1360-6, 2014 Aug.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25055138
ABSTRACT
IMPORTANCE: Intracoronary pressure wire-derived measurements of fractional flow reserve (FFR) and intravascular ultrasonography (IVUS) provide functional and anatomical information that can be used to guide coronary stent implantation. Although these devices are widely used and recommended by guidelines, limited data exist about their effect on clinical end points.

OBJECTIVE:

To determine the effect on long-term survival of using FFR and IVUS during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

DESIGN AND SETTING:

Cohort study based on the pan-London (United Kingdom) PCI registry. In total, 64,232 patients are included in this registry covering the London, England, area.PARTICIPANTS: All patients (n = 41,688) who underwent elective or urgent PCI in National Health Service hospitals in London between January 1, 2004, and July 31, 2011, were included. Patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (n = 11,370) were excluded.INTERVENTIONS: Patients underwent PCI guided by angiography (visual lesion assessment) alone, PCI guided by FFR, or IVUS-guided PCI.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES:

The primary end point was all-cause mortality at a median of 3.3 years.

RESULTS:

Fractional flow reserve was used in 2767 patients (6.6%) and IVUS was used in 1831 patients (4.4%). No difference in mortality was observed between patients who underwent angiography-guided PCI compared with patients who underwent FFR-guided PCI (hazard ratio, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.67-1.16; P = .37). Patients who underwent IVUS had a slightly higher adjusted mortality (hazard ratio, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.09-1.78; P = .009) compared with patients who underwent angiography-guided PCI. However, this difference was no longer statistically significant in a propensity score-based analysis (hazard ratio, 1.33; 95% CI, 0.85-2.09; P = .25). The mean (SD) number of implanted stents was lower in the FFR group (1.1 [1.2] stents) compared with the IVUS group (1.6 [1.3]) and the angiography-guided group (1.7 [1.1]) (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE:

In this large observational study, FFR-guided PCI and IVUS-guided PCI were not associated with improved long-term survival compared with standard angiography-guided PCI. The use of FFR was associated with the implantation of fewer stents.
Assuntos

Similares

MEDLINE

...
LILACS

LIS

Texto completo: Disponível Coleções: Bases de dados internacionais Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Stents / Mortalidade / Ultrassonografia de Intervenção / Reserva Fracionada de Fluxo Miocárdico / Angina Estável / Intervenção Coronária Percutânea / Infarto do Miocárdio Tipo de estudo: Estudo de coorte Aspecto clínico: Etiologia / Prognóstico Limite: Idoso / Feminino / Humanos / Masculino / Meia-Idade País/Região como assunto: Europa Idioma: Inglês Revista: JAMA Intern Med Ano de publicação: 2014 Tipo de documento: Artigo País de afiliação: Reino Unido