Clinical Outcomes and Cost-Effectiveness of Fractional Flow Reserve–Guided Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With Stable Coronary Artery Disease

  • William F. Fearon
    Division of Cardiovascular Medicine (W.F.F., T.N., M.A.H.)
  • Takeshi Nishi
    Division of Cardiovascular Medicine (W.F.F., T.N., M.A.H.)
  • Bernard De Bruyne
    Stanford University School of Medicine and Stanford Cardiovascular Institute, CA. Cardiovascular Center Aalst, Belgium (B.D.B., E.B.)
  • Derek B. Boothroyd
    Quantitative Sciences Unit (D.B.B.)
  • Emanuele Barbato
    Stanford University School of Medicine and Stanford Cardiovascular Institute, CA. Cardiovascular Center Aalst, Belgium (B.D.B., E.B.)
  • Pim Tonino
    Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands (P.T., N.H.J.P.)
  • Peter Jüni
    Applied Health Research Centre, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute of St Michael’s Hospital, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada (P.J.)
  • Nico H.J. Pijls
    Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands (P.T., N.H.J.P.)
  • Mark A. Hlatky
    Division of Cardiovascular Medicine (W.F.F., T.N., M.A.H.)

書誌事項

タイトル別名
  • Three-Year Follow-Up of the FAME 2 Trial (Fractional Flow Reserve Versus Angiography for Multivessel Evaluation)

抄録

<jats:sec> <jats:title>Background:</jats:title> <jats:p>Previous studies found that percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) does not improve outcome compared with medical therapy (MT) in patients with stable coronary artery disease, but PCI was guided by angiography alone. FAME 2 trial (Fractional Flow Reserve Versus Angiography for Multivessel Evaluation) compared PCI guided by fractional flow reserve with best MT in patients with stable coronary artery disease to assess clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Methods:</jats:title> <jats:p>A total of 888 patients with stable single-vessel or multivessel coronary artery disease with reduced fractional flow reserve were randomly assigned to PCI plus MT (n=447) or MT alone (n=441). Major adverse cardiac events included death, myocardial infarction, and urgent revascularization. Costs were calculated on the basis of resource use and Medicare reimbursement rates. Changes in quality-adjusted life-years were assessed with utilities determined by the European Quality of Life–5 Dimensions health survey at baseline and over follow-up.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Results:</jats:title> <jats:p> Major adverse cardiac events at 3 years were significantly lower in the PCI group compared with the MT group (10.1% versus 22.0%; <jats:italic>P</jats:italic> <0.001), primarily as a result of a lower rate of urgent revascularization (4.3% versus 17.2%; <jats:italic>P</jats:italic> <0.001). Death and myocardial infarction were numerically lower in the PCI group (8.3% versus 10.4%; <jats:italic>P</jats:italic> =0.28). Angina was significantly less severe in the PCI group at all follow-up points to 3 years. Mean initial costs were higher in the PCI group ($9944 versus $4440; <jats:italic>P</jats:italic> <0.001) but by 3 years were similar between the 2 groups ($16 792 versus $16 737; <jats:italic>P</jats:italic> =0.94). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for PCI compared with MT was $17 300 per quality-adjusted life-year at 2 years and $1600 per quality-adjusted life-year at 3 years. The above findings were robust in sensitivity analyses. </jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>ConclusionS:</jats:title> <jats:p>PCI of lesions with reduced fractional flow reserve improves long-term outcome and is economically attractive compared with MT alone in patients with stable coronary artery disease.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Clinical Trial Registration:</jats:title> <jats:p> URL: <jats:ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://www.clinicaltrials.gov">https://www.clinicaltrials.gov</jats:ext-link> . Unique identifier: NCT01132495. </jats:p> </jats:sec>

収録刊行物

  • Circulation

    Circulation 137 (5), 480-487, 2018-01-30

    Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

被引用文献 (6)*注記

もっと見る

詳細情報 詳細情報について

問題の指摘

ページトップへ