GLORIA

GEOMAR Library Ocean Research Information Access

Your email was sent successfully. Check your inbox.

An error occurred while sending the email. Please try again.

Proceed reservation?

Export
Filter
  • BMJ  (1)
  • Elbadawi, Ayman  (1)
Material
Publisher
  • BMJ  (1)
Language
Years
  • 1
    In: Heart, BMJ, Vol. 108, No. 21 ( 2022-11), p. 1699-1706
    Abstract: Randomised trials evaluating the efficacy and safety of fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guided versus angiography-guided revascularisation among patients with obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) have yielded mixed results. Aims To examine the comparative efficacy and safety of FFR-guided versus angiography-guided revascularisation among patients with obstructive CAD. Methods An electronic search of MEDLINE, SCOPUS and Cochrane databases without language restrictions was performed through November 2021 for randomised controlled trials that evaluated the outcomes of FFR-guided versus angiography-guided revascularisation. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiac events (MACE). Data were pooled using a random-effects model. Results The final analysis included seven trials with 5094 patients. The weighted mean follow-up duration was 38 months. Compared with angiography guidance, FFR guidance was associated with fewer number of stents during revascularisation (standardised mean difference=−0.80; 95% CI −1.33 to −0.27), but no difference in total hospital cost. There was no difference between FFR-guided and angiography-guided revascularisation in long-term MACE (13.6% vs 13.9%; risk ratio (RR) 0.97, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.11). Meta-regression analyses did not reveal any evidence of effect modification for MACE with acute coronary syndrome (p=0.36), proportion of three-vessel disease (p=0.88) or left main disease (p=0.50). There were no differences between FFR-guided and angiography-guided revascularisation in the outcomes all-cause mortality (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.68), cardiovascular mortality (RR 1.27, 95% CI 0.50 to 3.26), repeat revascularisation (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.21), recurrent myocardial infarction (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.14) or stent thrombosis (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.21). Conclusion Among patients with obstructive CAD, FFR-guided revascularisation did not reduce the risk of long-term adverse cardiac events or the individual outcomes. However, FFR-guided revascularisation was associated with fewer number of stents. PROSPERO registration number CRD42021291596.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 1355-6037 , 1468-201X
    Language: English
    Publisher: BMJ
    Publication Date: 2022
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2378689-9
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 1475501-4
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
Close ⊗
This website uses cookies and the analysis tool Matomo. More information can be found here...