Clinical Impact of Concordant and Discordant Physiology Parameters Post-Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in the EASY-PREDICT Study.

Paola Ulacia Flores, Tomas Cieza, Safia Ouarrak, Andrés Ruhl, Siddhartha Mengi, Robert De Larochellière, David Garcia-Labbé, Jean-Pierre Déry, Anthony Poulin, Éric Larose, Bernard Noël, Can Manh Nguyen, Jean-Michel Paradis, Olivier F Bertrand
{"title":"Clinical Impact of Concordant and Discordant Physiology Parameters Post-Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in the EASY-PREDICT Study.","authors":"Paola Ulacia Flores, Tomas Cieza, Safia Ouarrak, Andrés Ruhl, Siddhartha Mengi, Robert De Larochellière, David Garcia-Labbé, Jean-Pierre Déry, Anthony Poulin, Éric Larose, Bernard Noël, Can Manh Nguyen, Jean-Michel Paradis, Olivier F Bertrand","doi":"10.1002/ccd.70266","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In the EASY-PREDICT Study, patients were randomized to angiography-guidance or post-percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) physiology-guidance. Discordance between resting and hyperemic physiology post-PCI might have a different relationship with clinical outcomes.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>The EASY-PREDICT study showed that routine post-PCI physiology assessment was not associated with improved outcomes compared to angiography-guidance only. We aimed to assess whether resting and hyperemic post-PCI physiology had a different clinical impact.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>All-comer patients referred for diagnostic angiography and possible PCI were recruited in a high-volume university hospital and randomized after uncomplicated PCI to angiography-only or target vessel physiology. We studied the concordance and discordance between resting (dPR) and hyperemic (FFR) physiologic parameters post-PCI using ischemic thresholds (dPR ≤ 0.89 and FFR ≤ 0.80) and clinical outcomes up to 18 months post-PCI.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 221 patients (325 lesions) with successful PCI were randomized to either group, 219 of which were included in the per protocol analysis. In the physiology group, 132 lesions with available post-PCI physiology were included and 109 (82.6%) had final concordant physiology results post-PCI. Discordance was observed in 15.15% of lesions, 2.3% FFR ischemic (dPR-|FFR+) and 12.9% dPR ischemic (dPR+|FFR-) respectively. At 18 months clinical follow-up, Target Vessel Failure (TVF) was 12.3% in the concordant sub-group whereas TVF was 40.0% in the discordant subgroup.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>After PCI, physiology discordance between dPR and FFR occurred in ~15% of the cases. Patients with discordant physiology results post-PCI appeared to have higher TVF rates compared to concordant physiology sub-groups.</p>","PeriodicalId":520583,"journal":{"name":"Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.70266","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: In the EASY-PREDICT Study, patients were randomized to angiography-guidance or post-percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) physiology-guidance. Discordance between resting and hyperemic physiology post-PCI might have a different relationship with clinical outcomes.

Aims: The EASY-PREDICT study showed that routine post-PCI physiology assessment was not associated with improved outcomes compared to angiography-guidance only. We aimed to assess whether resting and hyperemic post-PCI physiology had a different clinical impact.

Methods: All-comer patients referred for diagnostic angiography and possible PCI were recruited in a high-volume university hospital and randomized after uncomplicated PCI to angiography-only or target vessel physiology. We studied the concordance and discordance between resting (dPR) and hyperemic (FFR) physiologic parameters post-PCI using ischemic thresholds (dPR ≤ 0.89 and FFR ≤ 0.80) and clinical outcomes up to 18 months post-PCI.

Results: A total of 221 patients (325 lesions) with successful PCI were randomized to either group, 219 of which were included in the per protocol analysis. In the physiology group, 132 lesions with available post-PCI physiology were included and 109 (82.6%) had final concordant physiology results post-PCI. Discordance was observed in 15.15% of lesions, 2.3% FFR ischemic (dPR-|FFR+) and 12.9% dPR ischemic (dPR+|FFR-) respectively. At 18 months clinical follow-up, Target Vessel Failure (TVF) was 12.3% in the concordant sub-group whereas TVF was 40.0% in the discordant subgroup.

Conclusions: After PCI, physiology discordance between dPR and FFR occurred in ~15% of the cases. Patients with discordant physiology results post-PCI appeared to have higher TVF rates compared to concordant physiology sub-groups.

EASY-PREDICT研究中经皮冠状动脉介入治疗后生理参数一致性和不一致性的临床影响。
背景:在EASY-PREDICT研究中,患者被随机分为血管造影指导组或经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)后生理指导组。pci术后静息和充血生理学之间的不一致可能与临床结果有不同的关系。目的:EASY-PREDICT研究表明,与仅血管造影指导相比,常规pci后生理评估与预后改善无关。我们的目的是评估静息和充血后pci生理是否有不同的临床影响。方法:在一个大容量的大学医院招募所有诊断性血管造影和可能的PCI的患者,并在简单的PCI后随机分配到仅血管造影或靶血管生理学。我们使用缺血阈值(dPR≤0.89和FFR≤0.80)研究pci术后静息(dPR)和充血(FFR)生理参数与pci术后18个月临床结果之间的一致性和不一致性。结果:共221例成功行PCI的患者(325个病灶)被随机分为两组,其中219例被纳入每个方案分析。生理组纳入132个pci后生理条件可用的病变,其中109个(82.6%)pci后生理结果最终一致。15.15%的病变、2.3%的FFR缺血(dPR-|FFR+)和12.9%的dPR缺血(dPR+|FFR-)存在不一致性。在18个月的临床随访中,一致亚组的靶血管衰竭(TVF)为12.3%,而不一致亚组的TVF为40.0%。结论:PCI术后,约15%的患者出现dPR与FFR的生理不一致。与生理结果一致的亚组相比,pci后生理结果不一致的患者似乎有更高的TVF率。
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信