Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
1.
J Am Coll Cardiol ; 79(10): 965-974, 2022 03 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35272801

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) is a coronary physiology index used to assess the severity of coronary artery stenosis to guide revascularization. iFR has previously demonstrated noninferior short-term outcome compared to fractional flow reserve (FFR), but data on longer-term outcome have been lacking. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to investigate the prespecified 5-year follow-up of the primary composite outcome of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, and unplanned revascularization of the iFR-SWEDEHEART trial comparing iFR vs FFR in patients with chronic and acute coronary syndromes. METHODS: iFR-SWEDEHEART was a multicenter, controlled, open-label, registry-based randomized clinical trial using the Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry for enrollment. A total of 2,037 patients were randomized to undergo revascularization guided by iFR or FFR. RESULTS: No patients were lost to follow-up. At 5 years, the rate of the primary composite endpoint was 21.5% in the iFR group and 19.9% in the FFR group (HR: 1.09; 95% CI: 0.90-1.33). The rates of all-cause death (9.4% vs 7.9%; HR: 1.20; 95% CI: 0.89-1.62), nonfatal myocardial infarction (5.7% vs 5.8%; HR: 1.00; 95% CI: 0.70-1.44), and unplanned revascularization (11.6% vs 11.3%; HR: 1.02; 95% CI: 0.79-1.32) were also not different between the 2 groups. The outcomes were consistent across prespecified subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with chronic or acute coronary syndromes, an iFR-guided revascularization strategy was associated with no difference in the 5-year composite outcome of death, myocardial infarction, and unplanned revascularization compared with an FFR-guided revascularization strategy. (Evaluation of iFR vs FFR in Stable Angina or Acute Coronary Syndrome [iFR SWEDEHEART]; NCT02166736).


Subject(s)
Acute Coronary Syndrome , Coronary Stenosis , Fractional Flow Reserve, Myocardial , Myocardial Infarction , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention , Acute Coronary Syndrome/complications , Acute Coronary Syndrome/diagnosis , Acute Coronary Syndrome/therapy , Coronary Angiography , Coronary Stenosis/surgery , Humans , Myocardial Infarction/complications , Myocardial Infarction/diagnosis , Myocardial Infarction/epidemiology , Severity of Illness Index
2.
JACC Cardiovasc Interv ; 11(15): 1437-1449, 2018 08 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30093050

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical outcomes of patients deferred from coronary revascularization on the basis of instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) or fractional flow reserve (FFR) measurements in stable angina pectoris (SAP) and acute coronary syndromes (ACS). BACKGROUND: Assessment of coronary stenosis severity with pressure guidewires is recommended to determine the need for myocardial revascularization. METHODS: The safety of deferral of coronary revascularization in the pooled per-protocol population (n = 4,486) of the DEFINE-FLAIR (Functional Lesion Assessment of Intermediate Stenosis to Guide Revascularisation) and iFR-SWEDEHEART (Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio Versus Fractional Flow Reserve in Patients With Stable Angina Pectoris or Acute Coronary Syndrome) randomized clinical trials was investigated. Patients were stratified according to revascularization decision making on the basis of iFR or FFR and to clinical presentation (SAP or ACS). The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as the composite of all-cause death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or unplanned revascularization at 1 year. RESULTS: Coronary revascularization was deferred in 2,130 patients. Deferral was performed in 1,117 patients (50%) in the iFR group and 1,013 patients (45%) in the FFR group (p < 0.01). At 1 year, the MACE rate in the deferred population was similar between the iFR and FFR groups (4.12% vs. 4.05%; fully adjusted hazard ratio: 1.13; 95% confidence interval: 0.72 to 1.79; p = 0.60). A clinical presentation with ACS was associated with a higher MACE rate compared with SAP in deferred patients (5.91% vs. 3.64% in ACS and SAP, respectively; fully adjusted hazard ratio: 0.61 in favor of SAP; 95% confidence interval: 0.38 to 0.99; p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, deferral of revascularization is equally safe with both iFR and FFR, with a low MACE rate of about 4%. Lesions were more frequently deferred when iFR was used to assess physiological significance. In deferred patients presenting with ACS, the event rate was significantly increased compared with SAP at 1 year.


Subject(s)
Acute Coronary Syndrome/diagnosis , Angina, Stable/diagnosis , Cardiac Catheterization , Coronary Artery Disease/diagnosis , Coronary Stenosis/diagnosis , Fractional Flow Reserve, Myocardial , Myocardial Revascularization , Time-to-Treatment , Acute Coronary Syndrome/physiopathology , Acute Coronary Syndrome/therapy , Aged , Angina, Stable/physiopathology , Angina, Stable/therapy , Clinical Decision-Making , Coronary Artery Disease/physiopathology , Coronary Artery Disease/therapy , Coronary Stenosis/physiopathology , Coronary Stenosis/therapy , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Myocardial Revascularization/adverse effects , Patient Selection , Predictive Value of Tests , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Risk Factors , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome
3.
N Engl J Med ; 376(19): 1813-1823, 2017 05 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28317438

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) is an index used to assess the severity of coronary-artery stenosis. The index has been tested against fractional flow reserve (FFR) in small trials, and the two measures have been found to have similar diagnostic accuracy. However, studies of clinical outcomes associated with the use of iFR are lacking. We aimed to evaluate whether iFR is noninferior to FFR with respect to the rate of subsequent major adverse cardiac events. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, randomized, controlled, open-label clinical trial using the Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry for enrollment. A total of 2037 participants with stable angina or an acute coronary syndrome who had an indication for physiologically guided assessment of coronary-artery stenosis were randomly assigned to undergo revascularization guided by either iFR or FFR. The primary end point was the rate of a composite of death from any cause, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or unplanned revascularization within 12 months after the procedure. RESULTS: A primary end-point event occurred in 68 of 1012 patients (6.7%) in the iFR group and in 61 of 1007 (6.1%) in the FFR group (difference in event rates, 0.7 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.5 to 2.8; P=0.007 for noninferiority; hazard ratio, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.79 to 1.58; P=0.53); the upper limit of the 95% confidence interval for the difference in event rates fell within the prespecified noninferiority margin of 3.2 percentage points. The results were similar among major subgroups. The rates of myocardial infarction, target-lesion revascularization, restenosis, and stent thrombosis did not differ significantly between the two groups. A significantly higher proportion of patients in the FFR group than in the iFR group reported chest discomfort during the procedure. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with stable angina or an acute coronary syndrome, an iFR-guided revascularization strategy was noninferior to an FFR-guided revascularization strategy with respect to the rate of major adverse cardiac events at 12 months. (Funded by Philips Volcano; iFR SWEDEHEART ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02166736 .).


Subject(s)
Acute Coronary Syndrome/physiopathology , Angina Pectoris/physiopathology , Coronary Stenosis/physiopathology , Coronary Stenosis/therapy , Fractional Flow Reserve, Myocardial , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/methods , Acute Coronary Syndrome/diagnostic imaging , Aged , Angina Pectoris/diagnostic imaging , Cardiovascular Diseases/mortality , Coronary Angiography , Coronary Stenosis/complications , Coronary Stenosis/diagnostic imaging , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Kaplan-Meier Estimate , Male , Middle Aged , Myocardial Infarction/epidemiology , Retreatment , Severity of Illness Index
4.
BMC Vet Res ; 8: 59, 2012 May 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22607497

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Infection with Coxiella burnetii, the cause of Q-fever, has never been detected in Norwegian animals. Recognising the increasing prevalence of the infection in neighbouring countries, the aim of the study was to perform a survey of Norwegian farmed ruminants for the prevalence of C. burnetii infection. RESULTS: Milk and blood samples from more than 3450 Norwegian dairy cattle herds, 55 beef cattle herds, 348 dairy goat herds and 118 sheep flocks were serologically examined for antibodies against C. burnetii. All samples were negative for antibodies against C. burnetii. The estimated prevalences of infected herds were 0 (95% confidence interval: 0% - 0.12%), 0 (0% - 12%), 0 (0% - 1.2%) and 0 (0% - 10%) for dairy cattle herds, beef cattle herds, goat herds and sheep flocks, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The study indicates that the prevalence of C. burnetii infection in farmed Norwegian ruminants is low, and it cannot be excluded that Norway is free of the infection. It would be beneficial if Norway was able to maintain the current situation. Therefore, preventive measures should be continued.


Subject(s)
Cattle Diseases/microbiology , Coxiella burnetii , Goat Diseases/microbiology , Q Fever/veterinary , Sheep Diseases/microbiology , Animals , Antibodies, Bacterial/blood , Cattle , Cattle Diseases/blood , Cattle Diseases/epidemiology , Goat Diseases/blood , Goat Diseases/epidemiology , Goats , Norway/epidemiology , Prevalence , Q Fever/epidemiology , Sheep , Sheep Diseases/blood , Sheep Diseases/epidemiology
5.
Acta Vet Scand ; 52: 2, 2010 Jan 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-20070900

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Reproductive disorders associated with chlamydial infection have been reported worldwide in cattle and there are indications of potential venereal transmission. METHODS: Semen samples from 21 dairy bulls and cauda epididymidis tissue samples from 43 beef bulls were analysed for chlamydial agent by real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) including an internal amplification control (mimic). Additionally, presence of antibodies against Chlamydophila (Cp.) abortus among the bulls was investigated with the commercial Pourquier ELISA Cp. abortus serum verification kit. RESULTS: No chlamydial agent was detected by PCR in either the semen samples or in the tissue samples. Additionally, no antibodies against Cp. abortus were detected. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that Cp. abortus is very rare, or absent in Swedish bulls and thus the risk for venereal transmission of chlamydial infection through their semen is low. However, because Chlamydophila spp. infection rates seem to differ throughout the world, it is essential to clarify the relative importance of transmission of the infection through semen on cattle fertility.


Subject(s)
Cattle Diseases/microbiology , Chlamydophila Infections/veterinary , Chlamydophila/isolation & purification , Epididymis/microbiology , Semen/microbiology , Animal Husbandry , Animals , Antibodies, Bacterial , Breeding , Cattle , Cattle Diseases/transmission , Chlamydophila/genetics , Chlamydophila/immunology , Chlamydophila Infections/microbiology , Chlamydophila Infections/transmission , DNA, Bacterial , Female , Fertility , Male , Seroepidemiologic Studies
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...