The aim of the study is to compare post-interventional fractional flow reserve (FFR) value between optical coherence tomography(OCT)-guided and angiography-guided strategy for treatment of complex coronary lesion.
There has been ample evidence of the role of intracoronary imaging for optimizing the stent, especially among the patients with complex coronary lesions. Intracoronary imaging can be used during the entire process of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), from pre-PCI to post-PCI stages. Notably, approximately 15-20% of patients who underwent angiographically successful PCI showed significant stent underexpansion, malapposition, intra-stent thrombus formation, and edge dissection on intracoronary imaging studies, including optical coherence tomography (OCT). Meanwhile, the role of pre-interventional fractional flow reserve (FFR) measurement has been well established and recommended by recent guideline. However, although previous studies evaluated the efficacy and safety of FFR-guided decision-making followed by angiographic stent implantation, they did not evaluate functionally optimized revascularization. Actually, the vessels with low post-PCI FFR had substantial proportions of suboptimized stented (underexpansion and acute malapposition) and residual disease in non-stented segments. Furthermore, several large observational studies have suggested that suboptimal physiologic results after PCI is associated with an increased risk of clinical events. Previously, the DOCTORS trial found out that OCT-guided PCI was associated with higher post-PCI FFR than angiography-guided PCI (0.94±0.04 vs. 0.92±0.05, P=0.005). Therefore, OCT can be a useful tool for acquiring functional optimal results after stent implantation. This synergic effect between OCT and post-PCI FFR can be maximized when the investigators perform PCI for complex lesions. This study sought to evaluate compare post-interventional FFR value between OCT-guided and angiography-guided strategy for treatment of complex coronary lesion.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Enrollment
320
For patients randomly allocated to this arm, PCI for complex lesions will be performed using OCT. OCT Reference site: Most normal looking segment, No Lipidic plaque. Operator can decide 1 of 2 methods for stent sizing. 1. By measuring vessel diameter at the distal reference sites (in case of ≥180° of the external elastic membrane \[EEL\] can be identified). In this case, stent diameter will be determined using mean external elastic membrane diameter at the distal reference, rounded down to the nearest 0.25mm (Ex\> mean external elastic membrane reference diameter 3.35mm, 3.25mm stent diameter will be chosen). 2. By measuring lumen diameter at the distal reference sites (in case of ≥180° of the external elastic membrane cannot be identified). In this case, stent diameter will be determined using mean lumen diameter at the distal reference, rounded up to the nearest 0.25mm (Ex\> mean distal reference lumen diameter 2.55mm, 2.75mm stent diameter will be chosen).
For patients randomly allocated to this arm, PCI for complex lesions will be performed using angiography only. The optimization guided by angiography should meet the criteria of angiographic residual diameter stenosis less than 30% by visual estimation and the absence of flow limiting dissection (≥Type C dissection). When angiographic under-expansion of the stent is suspected, adjunctive balloon dilatation will be strongly recommended.
Chonnam National University Hospital
Gwangju, South Korea
Chung-Ang University Gwangmyeong Hospital
Gwangmyeong, South Korea
Samsung Medical Center
Seoul, South Korea
Seoul National University Hospital
Seoul, South Korea
Suboptimal post-PCI physiological results
Proportion of patients with a final post-interventional fractional flow reserve \<0.85
Time frame: Immediate after the index procedure
Rate of target vessel failure (TVF)
a composite of cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction (MI), and target-vessel revascularization (TVR)
Time frame: 2 years after last patient enrollment
Rate of all-cause death
death from any-cause
Time frame: 2 years after last patient enrollment
Rate of cardiac death
death from cardiac-cause
Time frame: 2 years after last patient enrollment
Rate of target vessel MI without periprocedural MI
Myocardial infarction without periprocedural myocardial infarction
Time frame: 2 years after last patient enrollment
Rate of target vessel MI with periprocedural MI
Myocardial infarction with periprocedural myocardial infarction
Time frame: 2 years after last patient enrollment
Rate of target lesion revascularization (TLR)
ischemia-driven or all
Time frame: 2 years after last patient enrollment
Rate of target vessel revascularization (TVR)
ischemia-driven or all
Time frame: 2 years after last patient enrollment
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.
All patient will be received percutaneous coronary intervention with second generation drug-eluting stent.
Rate of any MI
any myocardial infarction
Time frame: 2 years after last patient enrollment
Rate of any revascularization
ischemia-driven or all
Time frame: 2 years after last patient enrollment
Rate of stent thrombosis
definite, probable, or possible
Time frame: 2 years after last patient enrollment
FFR gain between pre- and post-interventional stages
\[Post-interventional fractional flow reserve value\] - \[Pre-interventional fractional flow reserve value\]
Time frame: Immediate after the index procedure
Trans-stent FFR gradient
FFR gradient across the stent (ΔFFRstent)
Time frame: Immediate after the index procedure
Post-interventional non-hyperemic pressure ratios
Values of post-PCI non-hyperemic pressure ratios
Time frame: Immediate after the index procedure