Yang Zhang, Bangguo Yang, Yicong Ye, Xiliang Zhao, Yaodong Ding, Yi Ye, Liang Zhang, Dawei Tan, Gong Zhang, Xiaoyu Duan, Quan Li, Yong Zeng
{"title":"遵守分数血流储备指导对各种血管相关临床结果的预后意义","authors":"Yang Zhang, Bangguo Yang, Yicong Ye, Xiliang Zhao, Yaodong Ding, Yi Ye, Liang Zhang, Dawei Tan, Gong Zhang, Xiaoyu Duan, Quan Li, Yong Zeng","doi":"10.3389/fcvm.2024.1370345","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In patients underwent fractional flow reserve (FFR) assessment, a noteworthy proportion of adverse events occur in vessels in which FFR has not been measured. However, the effect of these non-target vessel-related events on the evaluation of FFR-related benefits remains unknown.In this retrospective study, vessels subjected to FFR measurement were grouped as FFR-based approach and non-compliance with FFR based on whether they received FFR-based treatment. Using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) to account for potential confounding, we investigated the association between compliance with FFR and 5-year target vessel failure (TVF) non-target vessel failure (NTVF) and vessel-oriented composite endpoints (VOCEs). Of the 1,119 vessels, 201 did not receive FFR-based treatment. After IPTW adjustment, a significantly lower hazard of TVF was observed in the FFR-based approach group (HR: 0.56; 95% CI: 0.34–0.92). While, the intergroup difference in hazard of NTVF (HR: 1.02; 95% CI: 0.45–2.31) and VOCEs (HR: 0.69; 95% CI: 0.45–1.05) were nonsignificant.In patients with CAD subjected to FFR, the FFR-based treatment yields a sustained clinical benefit in terms of the risks of target vessel-related events. The dilution of non-target vessel-related events renders the difference favoring the FFR-based approach nonsignificant.","PeriodicalId":510752,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine","volume":"11 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Prognostic significance of compliance with fractional flow reserve guidance on diverse vessel-related clinical outcomes\",\"authors\":\"Yang Zhang, Bangguo Yang, Yicong Ye, Xiliang Zhao, Yaodong Ding, Yi Ye, Liang Zhang, Dawei Tan, Gong Zhang, Xiaoyu Duan, Quan Li, Yong Zeng\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/fcvm.2024.1370345\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In patients underwent fractional flow reserve (FFR) assessment, a noteworthy proportion of adverse events occur in vessels in which FFR has not been measured. However, the effect of these non-target vessel-related events on the evaluation of FFR-related benefits remains unknown.In this retrospective study, vessels subjected to FFR measurement were grouped as FFR-based approach and non-compliance with FFR based on whether they received FFR-based treatment. Using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) to account for potential confounding, we investigated the association between compliance with FFR and 5-year target vessel failure (TVF) non-target vessel failure (NTVF) and vessel-oriented composite endpoints (VOCEs). Of the 1,119 vessels, 201 did not receive FFR-based treatment. After IPTW adjustment, a significantly lower hazard of TVF was observed in the FFR-based approach group (HR: 0.56; 95% CI: 0.34–0.92). While, the intergroup difference in hazard of NTVF (HR: 1.02; 95% CI: 0.45–2.31) and VOCEs (HR: 0.69; 95% CI: 0.45–1.05) were nonsignificant.In patients with CAD subjected to FFR, the FFR-based treatment yields a sustained clinical benefit in terms of the risks of target vessel-related events. The dilution of non-target vessel-related events renders the difference favoring the FFR-based approach nonsignificant.\",\"PeriodicalId\":510752,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine\",\"volume\":\"11 3\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2024.1370345\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2024.1370345","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Prognostic significance of compliance with fractional flow reserve guidance on diverse vessel-related clinical outcomes
In patients underwent fractional flow reserve (FFR) assessment, a noteworthy proportion of adverse events occur in vessels in which FFR has not been measured. However, the effect of these non-target vessel-related events on the evaluation of FFR-related benefits remains unknown.In this retrospective study, vessels subjected to FFR measurement were grouped as FFR-based approach and non-compliance with FFR based on whether they received FFR-based treatment. Using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) to account for potential confounding, we investigated the association between compliance with FFR and 5-year target vessel failure (TVF) non-target vessel failure (NTVF) and vessel-oriented composite endpoints (VOCEs). Of the 1,119 vessels, 201 did not receive FFR-based treatment. After IPTW adjustment, a significantly lower hazard of TVF was observed in the FFR-based approach group (HR: 0.56; 95% CI: 0.34–0.92). While, the intergroup difference in hazard of NTVF (HR: 1.02; 95% CI: 0.45–2.31) and VOCEs (HR: 0.69; 95% CI: 0.45–1.05) were nonsignificant.In patients with CAD subjected to FFR, the FFR-based treatment yields a sustained clinical benefit in terms of the risks of target vessel-related events. The dilution of non-target vessel-related events renders the difference favoring the FFR-based approach nonsignificant.