Key result
Patients with post-PCI angina show ~24% less FFR improvement than those without angina.
Why the study?
Are patient and procedural factors, such as improvement in FFR, associated with post-PCI angina and quality of life in patients undergoing PCI?
Cohort (n=230)
Blinded
Are patient and procedural factors, such as improvement in FFR, associated with post-PCI angina and quality of life in patients undergoing PCI?
Absolute Event Rate: 43.1% vs 67%
p-value: p=<0.001
Larger improvements in FFR following PCI are associated with less angina and better quality of life at 3 months, suggesting intracoronary physiology can help set expectations for symptom relief.
May help set expectations for post-PCI symptom relief; extends observational FFR-angina links but leaves causal effects open.
Background: Twenty percent to 40% of patients are affected by angina after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), which is associated with anxiety, depression, impaired physical function, and reduced quality of life. Understanding patient and procedural factors associated with post-PCI angina may inform alternative approaches to treatment. Methods: Two hundred thirty patients undergoing PCI completed the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ-7) and European quality of life–5 dimension–5 level (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaires at baseline and 3 months post-PCI. Patients received blinded intracoronary physiology assessments before and after stenting. A post hoc analysis was performed to compare clinical and procedural characteristics among patients with and without post-PCI angina (defined by follow-up SAQ-angina frequency score <100). Results: Eighty-eight of 230 patients (38.3%) reported angina 3 months post-PCI and had a higher incidence of active smoking, atrial fibrillation, and history of previous myocardial infarction or PCI. Compared with patients with no angina at follow-up, they had lower baseline SAQ summary scores (69.48±24.12 versus 50.20±22.59, P <0.001) and EQ-5D-5L health index scores (0.84±0.15 versus 0.69±0.22, P <0.001). Pre-PCI fractional flow reserve (FFR) was lower among patients who had no post-PCI angina (0.56±0.15 versus 0.62±0.13, P =0.003). Percentage change in FFR after PCI had a moderate correlation with angina frequency score at follow-up ( r =0.36, P <0.0001). Patients with post-PCI angina had less improvement in FFR (43.1±33.5% versus 67.0±50.7%, P <0.001). There were no between-group differences in post-PCI FFR, coronary flow reserve, or corrected index of microcirculatory resistance. Patients with post-PCI angina had lower SAQ-summary scores (64.01±22 versus 95.16±8.72, P ≤0.001) and EQ-5D-5L index scores (0.69±0.26 versus 0.91±0.17, P ≤0.001) at follow-up. Conclusions: Larger improvements in FFR following PCI were associated with less angina and better quality of life at follow-up. In patients with stable symptoms, intracoronary physiology assessment can inform expectations of angina relief and quality of life improvement after stenting and thereby help to determine the appropriateness of PCI. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT03259815.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Collison et al. (2023) conducted a cohort in Angina after percutaneous coronary intervention (n=230). Post-PCI angina vs. No post-PCI angina was evaluated on Improvement in fractional flow reserve (FFR) (p=<0.001). Patients with post-PCI angina had significantly less improvement in fractional flow reserve compared to those without angina (43.1% vs 67.0%, P<0.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: