Peer-influenced content. Sources you trust. No registration required. This is HCN.

The New England Journal of MedicineFFR-Guided Complete or Culprit-Only PCI in Patients with Myocardial Infarction

Comparative Efficacy of FFR-Guided Revascularization in Multivessel Coronary Intervention

In an era where tailored treatment approaches are increasingly valued, the latest multinational, registry-based, randomized trial explores the efficacy of fractional flow reserve (FFR)–guided complete revascularization versus culprit-lesion-only percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and multivessel coronary artery disease. This study aims to clarify the optimal strategy for managing nonculprit lesions in a high-risk cardiac patient population.

Study Design:

  • Population: The study enrolled 1,542 patients with STEMI or very-high-risk non-STEMI (NSTEMI) who also presented with multivessel coronary artery disease.
  • Intervention: Participants were randomly assigned to undergo either FFR-guided complete revascularization of nonculprit lesions or no further revascularization beyond the initial culprit lesion PCI.
  • Follow-up Duration: The median follow-up period was 4.8 years, with an interquartile range from 4.3 to 5.2 years.
  • Study Type: Multinational, registry-based, randomized trial.

Key Findings:

  • Primary Outcome: The primary composite outcome of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, or unplanned revascularization occurred in 19.0% of the complete-revascularization group compared to 20.4% of the culprit-lesion-only group (hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.17; P=0.53).
  • Secondary Outcomes: There were no significant differences between the two groups in the rates of death from any cause or myocardial infarction, nor in unplanned revascularizations.
  • Safety Outcomes: No significant between-group differences were noted in terms of safety.

HCN Medical Memo
Although FFR-guided revascularization remains a cornerstone in managing coronary artery disease, this study suggests that in the context of STEMI or high-risk NSTEMI with multivessel involvement, the additional intervention beyond the culprit lesion does not significantly alter long-term outcomes. These insights should guide physicians in making more informed decisions regarding the extent of revascularization required, potentially leading to a more conservative approach in selected patient populations.

More in Coronary Artery Disease (CAD)

The Healthcare Communications Network is owned and operated by IQVIA Inc.

Click below to leave this site and continue to IQVIA’s Privacy Choices form