Key result
FFR-guided PCI fails noninferiority to CABG for 1-year major events in three-vessel CAD.
Why the study?
Does FFR-guided PCI provide noninferior outcomes compared to CABG for major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events in patients with three-vessel coronary artery disease?
RCT (n=1,500)
randomly assigned
Yes
Does FFR-guided PCI provide noninferior outcomes compared to CABG for major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events in patients with three-vessel coronary artery disease?
Hazard Ratio: 1.5 (95% CI 1.1–2.2)
Absolute Event Rate: 10.6% vs 6.9%
p-value: p=0.35 for noninferiority
In patients with three-vessel coronary artery disease, FFR-guided PCI with current-generation stents failed to show noninferiority to CABG for the 1-year composite outcome of MACCE.
BACKGROUND: Patients with three-vessel coronary artery disease have been found to have better outcomes with coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG) than with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), but studies in which PCI is guided by measurement of fractional flow reserve (FFR) have been lacking. METHODS: In this multicenter, international, noninferiority trial, patients with three-vessel coronary artery disease were randomly assigned to undergo CABG or FFR-guided PCI with current-generation zotarolimus-eluting stents. The primary end point was the occurrence within 1 year of a major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular event, defined as death from any cause, myocardial infarction, stroke, or repeat revascularization. Noninferiority of FFR-guided PCI to CABG was prespecified as an upper boundary of less than 1.65 for the 95% confidence interval of the hazard ratio. Secondary end points included a composite of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke; safety was also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 1500 patients underwent randomization at 48 centers. Patients assigned to undergo PCI received a mean (±SD) of 3.7±1.9 stents, and those assigned to undergo CABG received 3.4±1.0 distal anastomoses. The 1-year incidence of the composite primary end point was 10.6% among patients randomly assigned to undergo FFR-guided PCI and 6.9% among those assigned to undergo CABG (hazard ratio, 1.5; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1 to 2.2), findings that were not consistent with noninferiority of FFR-guided PCI (P = 0.35 for noninferiority). The incidence of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke was 7.3% in the FFR-guided PCI group and 5.2% in the CABG group (hazard ratio, 1.4; 95% CI, 0.9 to 2.1). The incidences of major bleeding, arrhythmia, and acute kidney injury were higher in the CABG group than in the FFR-guided PCI group. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with three-vessel coronary artery disease, FFR-guided PCI was not found to be noninferior to CABG with respect to the incidence of a composite of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or repeat revascularization at 1 year. (Funded by Medtronic and Abbott Vascular; FAME 3 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02100722.).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Fearon et al. (2021) conducted an RCT in three-vessel coronary artery disease (n=1,500). FFR-guided PCI vs. CABG was evaluated on major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular event (death from any cause, myocardial infarction, stroke, or repeat revascularization) (HR 1.5, 95% CI 1.1 to 2.2, p=0.35 for noninferiority). FFR-guided PCI was not noninferior to CABG for death, MI, stroke, or repeat revascularization at 1 year in patients with three-vessel CAD (HR 1.5; 95% CI 1.1-2.2; P=0.35 for noninferiority).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: