Coronary disease & ACSSecondary analysis
Quantitative Flow Ratio (QFR) for the Revascularization of Nonculprit Vessels in Myocardial Infarction (MI) Patients
- Secondary analysis of the FIRE randomised trial
- prespecified subanalysis
- propensity-matched
Authors' conclusion
This prespecified subanalysis of the FIRE trial provides evidence supporting the safety and efficacy of QFR-guided interventions for the treatment of nonculprit vessels in MI patients.
Study context
- Population
- Older MI patients with multivessel disease903 vessels, 685 patients with QFR
- Participants
- 1,445 patients
- Comparison
- QFR ≤0.80 vs QFR >0.80 in nonculprit vessels (culprit-only arm); QFR-guided vs wire-based functional assessment-guided revascularization (complete arm)
- QFR ≤0.80n = 366
- QFR-guidedn = 320
- Primary endpoint
- Vessel-oriented composite endpoint (VOCE)
- Follow-up
- 1 year
Primary result
As reported in the abstract
VOCE
Hazard ratio (95% CI)P value
QFR ≤0.80 vs QFR >0.80independent predictor; P for incidence comparison
2.79(1.64–4.75)
P < 0.001QFR-guided vs Wire-basedno significant difference; propensity-matched
0.57(0.28–1.15)
Original publication
QFR for the Revascularization of Nonculprit Vessels in MI Patients. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. Published 14 May 2024. doi:10.1016/j.jcin.2024.04.022
Summarised from the published abstract; every number is checked against it