Fractional flow reserve versus angiography for guiding PCI 

---

	Presenter | see Discussant report
	Nico HJ Pijls, FESC (Netherlands)

List of Authors:
Nico H.J. Pijls, Pim A.L. Tonino, Bernard De Bruyne, Volker Klauss, Ganesh Manoharan, Thomas Engstrom, Peter N. Ver Lee, Philip A. MacCarthy, Keith G. Oldroyd, William F. Fearon

Abstract:

Introduction:
In patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) it is unclear whether routine measurement of fractional flow reserve (FFR) in addition to angiography improves outcome.

Methods:
At 20 U.S. and European medical centers, 1005 patients with multivessel CAD were randomized to PCI with drug-eluting stents (DES) guided by angiography alone or guided by FFR measurements. Prior to randomization, lesions requiring PCI were indentified based on their angiographic appearance. Patients randomized to angiography-guided PCI underwent stenting of all indicated lesions, while those randomized to FFR-guided PCI underwent stenting of indicated lesions only if FFR was <= 0.80. The primary endpoint was the rate of death, nonfatal myocardial infarction or repeat revascularisation at 1 year.

Results:
Baseline characteristics were similar. The 1-year event rate was 18.3% in the angiography-guided group and 13.2% in the FFR-guided group (P=0.02).

Conclusion:
Further follow-up data, subgroup data, and cost-efficiency data will be shown.

---

	Discussant | see Presenter abstract
	Thomas Felix Luescher, FESC (Switzerland)

Report:

Notes to editor
This congress report accompanies a presentation given at the ESC Congress 2009. Written by the author himself/herself, this report does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the European Society of Cardiology.

The content of this article reflects the personal opinion of the author/s and is not necessarily the official position of the European Society of Cardiology.