Fractional Flow Reserve versus Angiography-Guided Management of Coronary Artery Disease: A Meta-Analysis of Contemporary Randomised Controlled Trials

Background and Aims: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing outcomes after fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guided versus angiography-guided management for obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) have produced conflicting results. We investigated the efficacy and safety of an FFR-guided versus angiography-guided management strategy among patients with obstructive CAD. Methods: A systematic electronic search of the major databases was performed from inception to September 2022. We included studies of patients presenting with angina or myocardial infarction (MI), managed with medications, percutaneous coronary intervention, or bypass graft surgery. A meta-analysis was performed by pooling the risk ratio (RR) using a random-effects model. The endpoints of interest were all-cause mortality, MI and unplanned revascularisation. Results: Eight RCTs, with outcome data from 5077 patients, were included. The weighted mean follow up was 22 months. When FFR-guided management was compared to angiography-guided management, there was no difference in all-cause mortality [3.5% vs. 3.7%, RR: 0.99 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.62−1.60), p = 0.98, heterogeneity (I2) 43%], MI [5.3% vs. 5.9%, RR: 0.93 (95%CI 0.66−1.32), p = 0.69, I2 42%], or unplanned revascularisation [7.4% vs. 7.9%, RR: 0.92 (95%CI 0.76−1.11), p = 0.37, I2 0%]. However, the number patients undergoing planned revascularisation by either stent or surgery was significantly lower with an FFR-guided strategy [weighted mean difference: 14 (95% CI 3 to 25)%, p =< 0.001]. Conclusion: In patients with obstructive CAD, an FFR-guided management strategy did not impact on all-cause mortality, MI and unplanned revascularisation, when compared to an angiography-guided management strategy, but led to up to a quarter less patients needing revascularisation.

A Noncontrast CMR Risk Score for Long-Term Risk Stratification in Reperfused ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction

OBJECTIVES

This study compared the prognostic value of a noncontrast CMR risk score for the composite of all-cause death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and new congestive heart failure.

BACKGROUND

A cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) risk score including left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), myocardial infarct (MI) size, and microvascular obstruction (MVO) was recently proposed to risk-stratify patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).

METHODS

The Eitel CMR risk score and GRACE (Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events) score were used as a reference (Score 1: acute MI size ≥19% LV, LVEF ≤47%, MVO >1.4% LV and GRACE score). MVO was replaced by intramyocardial hemorrhage (IMH) in Score 2 (acute MI size ≥19% LV, LVEF ≤47%, IMH, and GRACE score). Score 3 included only LVEF ≤45%, IMH, and GRACE score.

RESULTS

There were 370 patients in the derivation cohort and 234 patients in the validation cohort. In the derivation cohort, the 3 scores performed similarly and better than GRACE score to predict the 1-year composite endpoint with C-statistics of 0.83, 0.83, 0.82, and 0.74, respectively. In the validation cohort, there was good discrimination and calibration of score 3, with a C-statistic of 0.87 and P = 0.71 in a Hosmer-Lemeshow test for goodness of fit, on the 1-year composite outcome. Kaplan-Meier curves for 5-year composite outcome showed that those with LVEF ≤45% (high-risk) and LVEF >45% and IMH (intermediate-risk) had significantly higher cumulative events than those with LVEF >45% and no IMH (low-risk), log-rank tests: P = 0.02 and P = 0.03, respectively. The HR for the high-risk group was 2.3 (95% CI: 1.1-4.7) and for the intermediate-risk group was 2.0 (95% CI: 1.0-3.8), and these remained significant after adjusting for the GRACE score.

CONCLUSIONS

This noncontrast CMR risk score has performance comparable to an established risk score, and patients with STEMI could be stratified into low risk (LVEF >45% and no IMH), intermediate risk (LVEF >45% and IMH), and high risk (LVEF ≤45%). (A Trial of Low-dose Adjunctive alTeplase During prIMary PCI [T-TIME]; NCT02257294) (Detection and Significance of Heart Injury in ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction [BHF MR-MI]; NCT02072850).

Risk Stratification Guided by the Index of Microcirculatory Resistance and Left Ventricular End-Diastolic Pressure in Acute Myocardial Infarction

BACKGROUND

The index of microcirculatory resistance (IMR) of the infarct-related artery and left ventricular end-diastolic pressure (LVEDP) are acute, prognostic biomarkers in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention. The clinical significance of IMR and LVEDP in combination is unknown.

METHODS

IMR and LVEDP were prospectively measured in a prespecified substudy of the T-TIME clinical trial (Trial of Low Dose Adjunctive Alteplase During Primary PCI). IMR was measured using a pressure- and temperature-sensing guidewire following percutaneous coronary intervention. Prognostically established thresholds for IMR (>32) and LVEDP (>18 mm Hg) were predefined. Contrast-enhanced cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging (1.5 Tesla) was acquired 2 to 7 days and 3 months postmyocardial infarction. The primary end point was major adverse cardiac events, defined as cardiac death/nonfatal myocardial infarction/heart failure hospitalization at 1 year.

RESULTS

IMR and LVEDP were both measured in 131 patients (mean age 59±10.7 years, 103 [78.6%] male, 48 [36.6%] with anterior myocardial infarction). The median IMR was 29 (interquartile range, 17-55), the median LVEDP was 17 mm Hg (interquartile range, 12-21), and the correlation between them was not statistically significant (r=0.15; P=0.087). Fifty-three patients (40%) had low IMR (≤32) and low LVEDP (≤18), 18 (14%) had low IMR and high LVEDP, 31 (24%) had high IMR and low LVEDP, while 29 (22%) had high IMR and high LVEDP. Infarct size (% LV mass), LV ejection fraction, final myocardial perfusion grade ≤1, TIMI (Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction) flow grade ≤2, and coronary flow reserve were associated with LVEDP/IMR group, as was hospitalization for heart failure (n=18 events; P=0.045) and major adverse cardiac events (n=21 events; P=0.051). LVEDP>18 and IMR>32 combined was associated with major adverse cardiac events, independent of age, estimated glomerular filtration rate, and infarct-related artery (odds ratio, 5.80 [95% CI, 1.60-21.22] P=0.008). The net reclassification improvement for detecting major adverse cardiac events was 50.6% (95% CI, 2.7-98.2; P=0.033) when LVEDP>18 was added to IMR>32.

CONCLUSIONS

IMR and LVEDP in combination have incremental value for risk stratification following primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT02257294.

The Potential Use of the Index of Microcirculatory Resistance to Guide Stratification of Patients for Adjunctive Therapy in Acute Myocardial Infarction

The goal of reperfusion therapies in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction has evolved to include effective reperfusion of the microcirculation subtended by the culprit epicardial coronary artery. The index of microcirculatory resistance is measured using a pressure- and temperature-sensing coronary guidewire and quantifies microvascular dysfunction. The index of microcirculatory resistance is an independent predictor of microvascular obstruction, infarct size, and adverse clinical outcomes. It has the advantage of being immediately measurable in the catheterization laboratory, before the results of blood biomarkers or noninvasive imaging become available. This provides an opportunity for additional intervention that may alter outcomes. In this review, the authors provide a critical appraisal of the published research on the emerging role of the index of microcirculatory resistance as a tool to guide the stratification of patients for adjunctive therapeutic strategies in acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.

Comparative Significance of Invasive Measures of Microvascular Injury in Acute Myocardial Infarction

BACKGROUND

The resistive reserve ratio (RRR) expresses the ratio between basal and hyperemic microvascular resistance. RRR measures the vasodilatory capacity of the microcirculation. We compared RRR, index of microcirculatory resistance (IMR), and coronary flow reserve (CFR) for predicting microvascular obstruction (MVO), myocardial hemorrhage, infarct size, and clinical outcomes, after ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction.

METHODS

In the T-TIME trial (Trial of Low-Dose Adjunctive Alteplase During Primary PCI), 440 patients with acute ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction from 11 UK hospitals were prospectively enrolled. In a subset of 144 patients, IMR, CFR, and RRR were measured post-primary percutaneous coronary intervention. MVO extent (% left ventricular mass) was determined by cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging at 2 to 7 days. Infarct size was determined at 3 months. One-year major adverse cardiac events, heart failure hospitalizations, and all-cause death/heart failure hospitalizations were assessed.

RESULTS

In these 144 patients (mean age, 59±11 years, 80% male), median IMR was 29.5 (interquartile range: 17.0-55.0), CFR was 1.4 (1.1-2.0), and RRR was 1.7 (1.3-2.3). MVO occurred in 41% of patients. IMR>40 was multivariably associated with more MVO (coefficient, 0.53 [95% CI, 0.05-1.02]; P=0.031), myocardial hemorrhage presence (odds ratio [OR], 3.20 [95% CI, 1.25-8.24]; P=0.016), and infarct size (coefficient, 5.05 [95% CI, 0.84-9.26]; P=0.019), independently of CFR≤2.0, RRR≤1.7, myocardial perfusion grade≤1, and Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction frame count. RRR was multivariably associated with MVO extent (coefficient, -0.60 [95% CI, -0.97 to -0.23]; P=0.002), myocardial hemorrhage presence (OR, 0.34 [95% CI, 0.15-0.75]; P=0.008), and infarct size (coefficient, -3.41 [95% CI, -6.76 to -0.06]; P=0.046). IMR>40 was associated with heart failure hospitalization (OR, 5.34 [95% CI, 1.80-15.81] P=0.002), major adverse cardiac events (OR, 4.46 [95% CI, 1.70-11.70] P=0.002), and all-cause death/ heart failure hospitalization (OR, 4.08 [95% CI, 1.55-10.79] P=0.005). RRR was associated with heart failure hospitalization (OR, 0.44 [95% CI, 0.19-0.99] P=0.047). CFR was not associated with infarct characteristics or clinical outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

In acute ST-segment-elevationl infarction, IMR and RRR, but not CFR, were associated with MVO, myocardial hemorrhage, infarct size, and clinical outcomes. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02257294.

Low-Dose Alteplase During Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention According to Ischemic Time

BACKGROUND

Microvascular obstruction affects one-half of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and confers an adverse prognosis.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to determine whether the efficacy and safety of a therapeutic strategy involving low-dose intracoronary alteplase infused early after coronary reperfusion associates with ischemic time.

METHODS

This study was conducted in a prospective, multicenter, parallel group, 1:1:1 randomized, dose-ranging trial in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Ischemic time, defined as the time from symptom onset to coronary reperfusion, was a pre-specified subgroup of interest. Between March 17, 2016, and December 21, 2017, 440 patients, presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction within 6 h of symptom onset (<2 h, n = 107; ≥2 h but <4 h, n = 235; ≥4 h to 6 h, n = 98), were enrolled at 11 U.K. hospitals. Participants were randomly assigned to treatment with placebo (n = 151), alteplase 10 mg (n = 144), or alteplase 20 mg (n = 145). The primary outcome was the amount of microvascular obstruction (MVO) (percentage of left ventricular mass) quantified by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging at 2 to 7 days (available for 396 of 440).

RESULTS

Overall, there was no association between alteplase dose and the extent of MVO (p for trend = 0.128). However, in patients with an ischemic time ≥4 to 6 h, alteplase increased the mean extent of MVO compared with placebo: 1.14% (placebo) versus 3.11% (10 mg) versus 5.20% (20 mg); p = 0.009 for the trend. The interaction between ischemic time and alteplase dose was statistically significant (p = 0.018).

CONCLUSION

In patients presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and an ischemic time ≥4 to 6 h, adjunctive treatment with low-dose intracoronary alteplase during primary percutaneous coronary intervention was associated with increased MVO. Intracoronary alteplase may be harmful for this subgroup. (A Trial of Low-Dose Adjunctive Alteplase During Primary PCI [T-TIME]; NCT02257294).

Effects of Intracoronary Alteplase on Microvascular Function in Acute Myocardial Infarction

Background

Impaired microcirculatory reperfusion worsens prognosis following acute ST‐segment–elevation myocardial infarction. In the T‐TIME (A Trial of Low‐Dose Adjunctive Alteplase During Primary PCI) trial, microvascular obstruction on cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging did not differ with adjunctive, low‐dose, intracoronary alteplase (10 or 20 mg) versus placebo during primary percutaneous coronary intervention. We evaluated the effects of intracoronary alteplase, during primary percutaneous coronary intervention, on the index of microcirculatory resistance, coronary flow reserve, and resistive reserve ratio.

Methods and Results

A prespecified physiology substudy of the T‐TIME trial. From 2016 to 2017, patients with ST‐segment–elevation myocardial infarction ≤6 hours from symptom onset were randomized in a double‐blind study to receive alteplase 20 mg, alteplase 10 mg, or placebo infused into the culprit artery postreperfusion, but prestenting. Index of microcirculatory resistance, coronary flow reserve, and resistive reserve ratio were measured after percutaneous coronary intervention. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance was performed at 2 to 7 days and 3 months. Analyses in relation to ischemic time (<2, 2–4, and ≥4 hours) were prespecified. One hundred forty‐four patients (mean age, 59±11 years; 80% male) were prospectively enrolled, representing 33% of the overall population (n=440). Overall, index of microcirculatory resistance (median, 29.5; interquartile range, 17.0–55.0), coronary flow reserve(1.4 [1.1–2.0]), and resistive reserve ratio (1.7 [1.3–2.3]) at the end of percutaneous coronary intervention did not differ between treatment groups. Interactions were observed between ischemic time and alteplase for coronary flow reserve (P=0.013), resistive reserve ratio (P=0.026), and microvascular obstruction (P=0.022), but not index of microcirculatory resistance.

Conclusions

In ST‐segment–elevation myocardial infarction with ischemic time ≤6 hours, there was overall no difference in microvascular function with alteplase versus placebo.

Clinical Trial Registration

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT02257294.

Hypertension, Microvascular Pathology, and Prognosis After an Acute Myocardial Infarction

The rationale for our study was to investigate the pathophysiology of microvascular injury in patients with acute ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction in relation to a history of hypertension. We undertook a cohort study using invasive and noninvasive measures of microvascular injury, cardiac magnetic resonance imaging at 2 days and 6 months, and assessed health outcomes in the longer term. Three hundred twenty-four patients with acute myocardial infarction (mean age, 59 [12] years; blood pressure, 135 [25] / 79 [14] mm Hg; 237 [73%] male, 105 [32%] with antecedent hypertension) were prospectively enrolled during emergency percutaneous coronary intervention. Compared with patients without antecedent hypertension, patients with hypertension were older (63 [12] years versus 57 [11] years; P<0.001) and a lower proportion were cigarette smokers (52 [50%] versus 144 [66%]; P=0.007). Coronary blood flow, microvascular resistance within the culprit artery, infarct pathologies, inflammation (C-reactive protein and interleukin-6) were not associated with hypertension. Compared with patients without antecedent hypertension, patients with hypertension had less improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction at 6 months from baseline (5.3 [8.2]% versus 7.4 [7.6]%; P=0.040). Antecedent hypertension was a multivariable associate of incident myocardial hemorrhage 2-day post-MI (1.81 [0.98-3.34]; P=0.059) and all-cause death or heart failure (n=47 events, n=24 with hypertension; 2.53 [1.28-4.98]; P=0.007) postdischarge (median follow-up 4 years). Severe progressive microvascular injury is implicated in the pathophysiology and prognosis of patients with a history of hypertension and acute myocardial infarction. Clinical Trial Registration- URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT02072850.

Effect of Low-Dose Intracoronary Alteplase During Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention on Microvascular Obstruction in Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Microvascular obstruction commonly affects patients with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and is associated with adverse outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether a therapeutic strategy involving low-dose intracoronary fibrinolytic therapy with alteplase infused early after coronary reperfusion will reduce microvascular obstruction.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Between March 17, 2016, and December 21, 2017, 440 patients presenting at 11 hospitals in the United Kingdom within 6 hours of STEMI due to a proximal-mid-vessel occlusion of a major coronary artery were randomized in a 1:1:1 dose-ranging trial design. Patient follow-up to 3 months was completed on April 12, 2018.

INTERVENTIONS

Participants were randomly assigned to treatment with placebo (n = 151), alteplase 10 mg (n = 144), or alteplase 20 mg (n = 145) by manual infusion over 5 to 10 minutes. The intervention was scheduled to occur early during the primary PCI procedure, after reperfusion of the infarct-related coronary artery and before stent implant.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was the amount of microvascular obstruction (% left ventricular mass) demonstrated by contrast-enhanced cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) conducted from days 2 through 7 after enrollment. The primary comparison was the alteplase 20-mg group vs the placebo group; if not significant, the alteplase 10-mg group vs the placebo group was considered a secondary analysis.

RESULTS

Recruitment stopped on December 21, 2017, because conditional power for the primary outcome based on a prespecified analysis of the first 267 randomized participants was less than 30% in both treatment groups (futility criterion). Among the 440 patients randomized (mean age, 60.5 years; 15% women), the primary end point was achieved in 396 patients (90%), 17 (3.9%) withdrew, and all others were followed up to 3 months. In the primary analysis, the mean microvascular obstruction did not differ between the 20-mg alteplase and placebo groups (3.5% vs 2.3%; estimated difference, 1.16%; 95% CI, -0.08% to 2.41%; P = .32) nor in the analysis of 10-mg alteplase vs placebo groups (2.6% vs 2.3%; estimated difference, 0.29%; 95% CI, -0.76% to 1.35%; P = .74). Major adverse cardiac events (cardiac death, nonfatal MI, unplanned hospitalization for heart failure) occurred in 15 patients (10.1%) in the placebo group, 18 (12.9%) in the 10-mg alteplase group, and 12 (8.2%) in the 20-mg alteplase group.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Among patients with acute STEMI presenting within 6 hours of symptoms, adjunctive low-dose intracoronary alteplase given during the primary percutaneous intervention did not reduce microvascular obstruction. The study findings do not support this treatment.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02257294.

A propensity matched comparison of return to work and quality of life after stenting or coronary artery bypass surgery

OBJECTIVES

We sought to determine (1) return to work (RTW) rates, (2) long-term employment (>12 months postprocedure), (3) time taken to RTW, and (4) quality of life (QoL), in patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG).

METHODS

Questionnaires regarding RTW were sent to 689 PCI and 169 CABG patients who underwent PCI or CABG at University Hospitals of Leicester Trust, UK, from May 2012 to May 2013. QoL was also measured using the European QoL 5-dimensions questionnaire (EQ-5D). Responses from patients employed preprocedure were analysed using multivariate logistic regression. Propensity score-matching was further used to compare similar patient populations receiving PCI or CABG.

RESULTS

The response rate was 38% (235 PCI and 88 CABG patients). 241 respondents (75%) were employed preprocedure. Of these 162 (93%) PCI and 51 (77%) CABG patients returned to work, whereas 147 (85%) PCI and 41 (62%) CABG patients were still employed at >12 months postprocedure. After propensity analysis, there was no significant difference between PCI and CABG patients in RTW, long-term employment, nor QoL. The median time taken to RTW was 6 weeks after PCI and 13 weeks after CABG (p=0.001). The effect remained significant after multivariate analysis (p=0.001) and propensity analysis (p=0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In this first propensity score-matched study comparing RTW and QoL after PCI or CABG strict propensity matching indicates that RTW or QoL, is similar for PCI or CABG, albeit the number of matched pairs was small. There are differences, however, in delay in RTW.