Key result
Patients with borderline FFR (0.75-0.85) and abnormal CTFC (>28) had a significantly higher cardiac event rate compared to those with normal FFR and normal CTFC (31.8% vs 7.6%, P=0.004).
Why the study?
Does combined FFR and CTFC measurement predict adverse cardiac events in patients with moderate coronary lesions deferred from revascularization?
Population
162 consecutive coronary patients with moderate coronary lesions in whom revascularization was deferred…
Comparison
Combined fractional flow reserve and corrected… vs Different strata of FFR and CTFC
Design
Cohort
Follow-up
mean 18 ± 10 months
Authors
Loading...
May aid risk stratification with combined FFR-CTFC in moderate lesions; leaves open validation in prospective trials.
Cohort (n=162)
Does combined FFR and CTFC measurement predict adverse cardiac events in patients with moderate coronary lesions deferred from revascularization?
Absolute Event Rate: 31.8% vs 7.6%
p-value: p=0.004
In patients with moderate coronary lesions deferred from revascularization based on FFR ≥0.75, borderline FFR combined with abnormal CTFC identifies a subgroup at significantly higher risk for adverse cardiac events.
Esen et al. (2010) conducted a cohort in Stable Angina Pectoris and Acute Coronary Syndrome (n=162). Borderline FFR (0.75-0.85) and abnormal CTFC (>28) vs. Normal FFR (>0.85) and normal CTFC (≤28) was evaluated on Adverse cardiac events (p=0.004). Patients with borderline FFR (0.75-0.85) and abnormal CTFC (>28) had a significantly higher cardiac event rate compared to those with normal FFR and normal CTFC (31.8% vs 7.6%, P=0.004).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: