Sex Differences in 5-Year Outcomes After Deferral of Revascularization Following Physiological Coronary Assessment.

Circulation reports Pub Date : 2024-01-31 eCollection Date: 2024-02-09 DOI:10.1253/circrep.CR-23-0100
Takayuki Ishihara, Shoichi Kuramitsu, Hitoshi Matsuo, Kazunori Horie, Hiroaki Takashima, Hidenobu Terai, Yuetsu Kikuta, Tatsuya Saigusa, Tomohiro Sakamoto, Nobuhiro Suematsu, Yasutsugu Shiono, Taku Asano, Kenichi Tsujita, Katsuhiko Masamura, Tatsuki Doijiri, Fumitoshi Toyota, Manabu Ogita, Tairo Kurita, Akiko Matsuo, Ken Harada, Kenji Yaginuma, Shinjo Sonoda, Hiroyoshi Yokoi, Nobuhiro Tanaka, Toshiaki Mano
{"title":"Sex Differences in 5-Year Outcomes After Deferral of Revascularization Following Physiological Coronary Assessment.","authors":"Takayuki Ishihara, Shoichi Kuramitsu, Hitoshi Matsuo, Kazunori Horie, Hiroaki Takashima, Hidenobu Terai, Yuetsu Kikuta, Tatsuya Saigusa, Tomohiro Sakamoto, Nobuhiro Suematsu, Yasutsugu Shiono, Taku Asano, Kenichi Tsujita, Katsuhiko Masamura, Tatsuki Doijiri, Fumitoshi Toyota, Manabu Ogita, Tairo Kurita, Akiko Matsuo, Ken Harada, Kenji Yaginuma, Shinjo Sonoda, Hiroyoshi Yokoi, Nobuhiro Tanaka, Toshiaki Mano","doi":"10.1253/circrep.CR-23-0100","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b><i>Background:</i></b> The relationship between sex differences and long-term outcomes after fractional flow reserve (FFR)- and instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR)-guided deferral of revascularization has yet to be elucidated. <b><i>Methods and Results:</i></b> From the J-CONFIRM registry (long-term outcomes of Japanese patients with deferral of coronary intervention based on FFR in a multicenter registry), this study included 432 lesions from 385 patients (men, 323 lesions in 286 patients; women, 109 lesions in 99 patients) with paired data of FFR and iFR. The primary endpoint was the cumulative 5-year incidence of target vessel failure (TVF), including cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, and clinically driven target vessel revascularization. The median FFR value was lower in men than in women (0.85 [0.81, 0.88] vs. 0.87 [0.83, 0.91], P=0.002), but the iFR value was comparable between men and women (0.94 [0.90, 0.98] vs. 0.93 [0.89, 0.98], P=0.26). The frequency of discordance between FFR and iFR was comparable between men and women (19.5% vs. 23.9%, P=0.34), although with different discordance patterns (P=0.036). The cumulative incidence of 5-year TVF did not differ between men and women after adjustment for baseline characteristics (13.9% vs. 6.9%, adjusted hazard ratio 1.82 [95% confidence interval: 0.44-7.56]; P=0.41). <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> Despite sex differences in the results for physiological indexes, the 5-year TVF in deferred lesions did not differ between men and women after adjustment for baseline characteristics.</p>","PeriodicalId":94305,"journal":{"name":"Circulation reports","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10853637/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Circulation reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1253/circrep.CR-23-0100","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The relationship between sex differences and long-term outcomes after fractional flow reserve (FFR)- and instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR)-guided deferral of revascularization has yet to be elucidated. Methods and Results: From the J-CONFIRM registry (long-term outcomes of Japanese patients with deferral of coronary intervention based on FFR in a multicenter registry), this study included 432 lesions from 385 patients (men, 323 lesions in 286 patients; women, 109 lesions in 99 patients) with paired data of FFR and iFR. The primary endpoint was the cumulative 5-year incidence of target vessel failure (TVF), including cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, and clinically driven target vessel revascularization. The median FFR value was lower in men than in women (0.85 [0.81, 0.88] vs. 0.87 [0.83, 0.91], P=0.002), but the iFR value was comparable between men and women (0.94 [0.90, 0.98] vs. 0.93 [0.89, 0.98], P=0.26). The frequency of discordance between FFR and iFR was comparable between men and women (19.5% vs. 23.9%, P=0.34), although with different discordance patterns (P=0.036). The cumulative incidence of 5-year TVF did not differ between men and women after adjustment for baseline characteristics (13.9% vs. 6.9%, adjusted hazard ratio 1.82 [95% confidence interval: 0.44-7.56]; P=0.41). Conclusions: Despite sex differences in the results for physiological indexes, the 5-year TVF in deferred lesions did not differ between men and women after adjustment for baseline characteristics.

生理冠状动脉评估后推迟血管重建术 5 年疗效的性别差异。
背景:在分数血流储备(FFR)和瞬时无波比(iFR)指导下推迟血管再通手术后,性别差异与长期预后之间的关系尚未阐明。方法和结果:本研究从 J-CONFIRM 登记(多中心登记中基于 FFR 推迟冠状动脉介入治疗的日本患者的长期预后)中纳入了 385 例患者的 432 个病变(男性,286 例患者中的 323 个病变;女性,99 例患者中的 109 个病变),这些病变均有 FFR 和 iFR 的配对数据。主要终点是靶血管衰竭(TVF)的累积 5 年发生率,包括心源性死亡、靶血管相关心肌梗死和临床驱动的靶血管血运重建。男性的中位 FFR 值低于女性(0.85 [0.81, 0.88] vs. 0.87 [0.83, 0.91],P=0.002),但男性和女性的 iFR 值相当(0.94 [0.90, 0.98] vs. 0.93 [0.89, 0.98],P=0.26)。男性和女性的 FFR 和 iFR 不一致的频率相当(19.5% vs. 23.9%,P=0.34),但不一致的模式不同(P=0.036)。调整基线特征后,男性和女性的 5 年 TVF 累计发生率没有差异(13.9% vs. 6.9%,调整后危险比 1.82 [95% 置信区间:0.44-7.56];P=0.41)。结论尽管生理指标的结果存在性别差异,但在对基线特征进行调整后,延迟病变的5年TVF在男女之间并无差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信