Sex Differences in Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio or Fractional Flow Reserve–Guided Revascularization Strategy
КАРДИОЛОГИЯ УЗБЕКИСТАНА 12(20): 2035-2046
Article 2019 English
Authors
CK
Chee Hae Kim
BK
Bon‐Kwon Koo
HD
Hakim-Moulay Dehbi
Abstract
2 min read
Objectives
This study sought to evaluate sex differences in procedural characteristics and clinical outcomes of instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR)– and fractional flow reserve (FFR)–guided revascularization strategies.
Background
An iFR-guided strategy has shown a lower revascularization rate than an FFR-guided strategy, without differences in clinical outcomes.
Methods
This is a post hoc analysis of the DEFINE-FLAIR (Functional Lesion Assessment of Intermediate stenosis to guide Revascularization) study, in which 601 women and 1,891 men were randomized to iFR- or FFR-guided strategy. The primary endpoint was 1-year major adverse cardiac events (MACE), a composite of all-cause death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or unplanned revascularization.
Results
Among the entire population, women had a lower number of functionally significant lesions per patient (0.31 ± 0.51 vs. 0.43 ± 0.59; p < 0.001) and less frequently underwent revascularization than men (42.1% vs. 53.1%; p < 0.001). There was no difference in mean iFR value according to sex (0.91 ± 0.09 vs. 0.91 ± 0.10; p = 0.442). However, the mean FFR value was lower in men than in women (0.83 ± 0.09 vs. 0.85 ± 0.10; p = 0.001). In men, an FFR-guided strategy was associated with a higher rate of revascularization than an iFR-guided strategy (57.1% vs. 49.3%; p = 0.001), but this difference was not observed in women (41.4% vs. 42.6%; p = 0.757). There was no difference in MACE rates between iFR- and FFR-guided strategies in both women (5.4% vs. 5.6%, adjusted hazard ratio: 1.10; 95% confidence interval: 0.50 to 2.43; p = 0.805) and men (6.6% vs. 7.0%, adjusted hazard ratio: 0.98; 95% confidence interval: 0.66 to 1.46; p = 0.919).
Conclusions
An FFR-guided strategy was associated with a higher rate of revascularization than iFR-guided strategy in men, but not in women. However, iFR- and FFR-guided strategies showed comparable clinical outcomes, regardless of sex. (Functional Lesion Assessment of Intermediate Stenosis to guide Revascularization [DEFINE-FLAIR]; NCT02053038)
Javier Escaned, Alejandro Travieso, Hakim‐Moulay Dehbi, Sukhjinder Nijjer, Sayan Sen, Ricardo Petraco, Manesh R. Patel, Patrick W. Serruys, Justin E. Davies, Justin E. Davies, Sayan Sen, Hakim‐Moulay Dehbi, Rasha Al‐Lamee, Ricardo Petraco, Sukhjinder Nijjer, Ravinay Bhindi, Sam J. Lehman, D. Walters, James Sapontis, Luc Janssens, Christiaan Vrints, Ahmed Khashaba, Mika Laine, Éric Van Belle, Florian Krackhardt, Waldemar Bojara, Olaf Göing, Tobias Härle, Ciro Indolfi, Giampaolo Niccoli, Flavio Ribichini, Nobuhiro Tanaka, Hiroyoshi Yokoi, Hiroaki Takashima, Yuetsu Kikuta, Andrejs Ērglis, Hugo Vinhas, Pedro Canas Silva, Sérgio Bravo Baptista, Ali Alghamdi, Farrel Hellig, Bon–Kwon Koo, Chang‐Wook Nam, Eun–Seok Shin, Joon‐Hyung Doh, Salvatore Brugaletta, Eduardo Alegría‐Barrero, Martijin Meuwissen, Jan J. Piek, Niels van Royen, Murat Sezer, Carlo Di Mario, Robert Gerber, Iqbal Malik, Andrew S.P. Sharp, Suneel Talwar, Kare Tang, Habib Samady, John D. Altman, Arnold H. Seto, Jasvindar Singh, Allen Jeremias, Hitoshi Matsuo, Rajesh Kharbanda, Manesh R. Patel, Patrick W. Serruys, Alejandro Travieso, Javier Escaned
Zia Ul Sabah, Adel Masswary, Abdullah Mohamed Asiri, Javed Iqbal Wani, Humayoun Khan Durrani, Shahid Aziz, Hafed Ahmad Alaskary, Ali Al Qarni, Ayyub Patel
Javier Escaned, Mauro Echavarría‐Pinto, Héctor M. García‐García, Tim P. van de Hoef, Ton de Vries, Prashant Kaul, Ganesh Raveendran, John D. Altman, Howard I. Kurz, Johannes Brechtken, Mark Tulli, Clemens von Birgelen, Joel E. Schneider, Ahmed Khashaba, Allen Jeremias, Jim Baucum, Raúl Moreno, Martijn Meuwissen, Gregory Mishkel, Robert‐Jan van Geuns, Howard A. Levite, Ramon López‐Palop, Marc Mayhew, ,
Discussion(0)
No comments yet. Be the first to comment.