Publication | Closed Access
Neurolymphomatosis of the lumbar plexus: High-resolution MR neurography findings
36
Citations
7
References
2001
Year
Adult Cardiac SurgeryAngiography GuidanceEndovascular TechniqueFractional Flow ReserveSurgerySpinal DisorderCoronary Artery DiseaseVascular ImagingNeurologyEndovascular ManagementPublic HealthFfr GuidanceNeuropathologyCardiologyCardiothoracic SurgeryRadiologyCardiovascular ImagingPercutaneous Coronary InterventionSpinal Cord InjuryLumbar PlexusDiagnostic NeuroradiologyCardiovascular DiseaseNeuroanatomyMedicineAnesthesiology
<h3>Background</h3> Randomised trials evaluating the efficacy and safety of fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guided versus angiography-guided revascularisation among patients with obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) have yielded mixed results. <h3>Aims</h3> To examine the comparative efficacy and safety of FFR-guided versus angiography-guided revascularisation among patients with obstructive CAD. <h3>Methods</h3> An electronic search of MEDLINE, SCOPUS and Cochrane databases without language restrictions was performed through November 2021 for randomised controlled trials that evaluated the outcomes of FFR-guided versus angiography-guided revascularisation. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiac events (MACE). Data were pooled using a random-effects model. <h3>Results</h3> The final analysis included seven trials with 5094 patients. The weighted mean follow-up duration was 38 months. Compared with angiography guidance, FFR guidance was associated with fewer number of stents during revascularisation (standardised mean difference=−0.80; 95% CI −1.33 to −0.27), but no difference in total hospital cost. There was no difference between FFR-guided and angiography-guided revascularisation in long-term MACE (13.6% vs 13.9%; risk ratio (RR) 0.97, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.11). Meta-regression analyses did not reveal any evidence of effect modification for MACE with acute coronary syndrome (p=0.36), proportion of three-vessel disease (p=0.88) or left main disease (p=0.50). There were no differences between FFR-guided and angiography-guided revascularisation in the outcomes all-cause mortality (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.68), cardiovascular mortality (RR 1.27, 95% CI 0.50 to 3.26), repeat revascularisation (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.21), recurrent myocardial infarction (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.14) or stent thrombosis (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.21). <h3>Conclusion</h3> Among patients with obstructive CAD, FFR-guided revascularisation did not reduce the risk of long-term adverse cardiac events or the individual outcomes. However, FFR-guided revascularisation was associated with fewer number of stents. <h3>PROSPERO registration number</h3> CRD42021291596.
| Year | Citations | |
|---|---|---|
Page 1
Page 1