Clinical Outcomes and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of FFR Compared with Angiography in Multivessel Disease Patient

• Autor(a) principal: Quintella,Edgard Freitas
• Data de Publicação: 2019
• Outros Autores: Ferreira,Esmeralci, Azevedo,Vitor Manuel Pereira, Araujo,Denizar V., Sant'Anna,Fernando Mendes, Amorim,Bernardo, Albuquerque,Denilson Campos de
• Tipo de documento: Artigo
• Idioma: eng
• Título da fonte: Arquivos Brasileiros de Cardiologia (Online)
• Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0066-782X2019000100040
• topic: Fractional Flow Reserve, Myocardial; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Coronary Artery Disease/economics; Angioplasty, Balloon, Coronary; Stents; Reserva Fracionada do Fluxo Miocárdio; Análise de Custo Benefício; Doença da Artéria Coronariana; Angioplastia Coronária com Balão; Stents

Abstract Background: In multivessel disease patients with moderate stenosis, fractional flow reserve (FFR) allows the analysis of the lesions and guides treatment, and could contribute to the cost-effectiveness (CE) of non-pharmacological stents (NPS). Objectives: To evaluate CE and clinical impact of FFR-guided versus angiography-guided angioplasty (ANGIO) in multivessel patients using NPS. Methods: Multivessel disease patients were prospectively randomized to FFR or ANGIO groups during a 5 year-period and followed for < 12 months. Outcomes measures were major adverse cardiac events (MACE), restenosis and CE. Results: We studied 69 patients, 47 (68.1%) men, aged 62.0 ± 9.0 years, 34 (49.2%) in FFR group and 53 (50.7%) in ANGIO group, with stable angina or acute coronary syndrome. In FFR, there were 26 patients with biarterial disease (76.5%) and 8 (23.5%) with triarterial disease, and in ANGIO, 24 (68.6%) with biarterial and 11 (31.4%) with triarterial disease. Twelve MACEs were observed - 3 deaths: 2 (5.8%) in FFR and 1 (2.8%) in ANGIO, 9 (13.0%) angina: 4(11.7%) in FFR and 5(14.2%) in ANGIO, 6 restenosis: 2(5.8%) in FFR and 4 (11.4%) in ANGIO. Angiography detected 87(53.0%) lesions in FFR, 39(23.7%) with PCI and 48(29.3%) with medical treatment; and 77 (47.0%) lesions in ANGIO, all treated with angioplasty. Thirty-nine (33.3%) stents were registered in FFR (0.45 ± 0.50 stents/lesion) and 78 (1.05 ± 0.22 stents/lesion) in ANGIO (p = 0.0001), 51.4% greater in ANGIO than FFR. CE analysis revealed a cost of BRL 5,045.97 BRL 5,430.60 in ANGIO and FFR, respectively. The difference of effectiveness was of 1.82%. Conclusion: FFR reduced the number of lesions treated and stents, and the need for target-lesion revascularization, with a CE comparable with that of angiography.