Title
|
|
|
|
Sex differences in instantaneous wave-free ratio or fractional flow reserve-guided revascularization strategy
| |
Author
|
|
|
|
| |
Abstract
|
|
|
|
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. (C) 2019 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation. |
| |
Language
|
|
|
|
English
| |
Source (journal)
|
|
|
|
JACC : cardiovascular interventions. - -
| |
Publication
|
|
|
|
2019
| |
ISSN
|
|
|
|
1936-8798
1876-7605
| |
DOI
|
|
|
|
10.1016/J.JCIN.2019.06.035
| |
Volume/pages
|
|
|
|
12
:20
(2019)
, p. 2035-2046
| |
ISI
|
|
|
|
000492029300009
| |
Pubmed ID
|
|
|
|
31648764
| |
Full text (Publisher's DOI)
|
|
|
|
| |
Full text (publisher's version - intranet only)
|
|
|
|
| |
|