Clinical Outcomes and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of FFR Compared with Angiography in Multivessel Disease Patient
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.
Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Digital revista |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Sociedade Brasileira de Cardiologia - SBC
2019
|
Online Access: | http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0066-782X2019000100040 |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
id |
oai:scielo:S0066-782X2019000100040 |
---|---|
record_format |
ojs |
spelling |
oai:scielo:S0066-782X20190001000402019-02-07Clinical Outcomes and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of FFR Compared with Angiography in Multivessel Disease PatientQuintella,Edgard FreitasFerreira,EsmeralciAzevedo,Vitor Manuel PereiraAraujo,Denizar V.Sant'Anna,Fernando MendesAmorim,BernardoAlbuquerque,Denilson Campos de 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.info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessSociedade Brasileira de Cardiologia - SBCArquivos Brasileiros de Cardiologia v.112 n.1 20192019-01-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articletext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0066-782X2019000100040en10.5935/abc.20180262 |
institution |
SCIELO |
collection |
OJS |
country |
Brasil |
countrycode |
BR |
component |
Revista |
access |
En linea |
databasecode |
rev-scielo-br |
tag |
revista |
region |
America del Sur |
libraryname |
SciELO |
language |
English |
format |
Digital |
author |
Quintella,Edgard Freitas Ferreira,Esmeralci Azevedo,Vitor Manuel Pereira Araujo,Denizar V. Sant'Anna,Fernando Mendes Amorim,Bernardo Albuquerque,Denilson Campos de |
spellingShingle |
Quintella,Edgard Freitas Ferreira,Esmeralci Azevedo,Vitor Manuel Pereira Araujo,Denizar V. Sant'Anna,Fernando Mendes Amorim,Bernardo Albuquerque,Denilson Campos de Clinical Outcomes and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of FFR Compared with Angiography in Multivessel Disease Patient |
author_facet |
Quintella,Edgard Freitas Ferreira,Esmeralci Azevedo,Vitor Manuel Pereira Araujo,Denizar V. Sant'Anna,Fernando Mendes Amorim,Bernardo Albuquerque,Denilson Campos de |
author_sort |
Quintella,Edgard Freitas |
title |
Clinical Outcomes and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of FFR Compared with Angiography in Multivessel Disease Patient |
title_short |
Clinical Outcomes and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of FFR Compared with Angiography in Multivessel Disease Patient |
title_full |
Clinical Outcomes and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of FFR Compared with Angiography in Multivessel Disease Patient |
title_fullStr |
Clinical Outcomes and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of FFR Compared with Angiography in Multivessel Disease Patient |
title_full_unstemmed |
Clinical Outcomes and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of FFR Compared with Angiography in Multivessel Disease Patient |
title_sort |
clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness analysis of ffr compared with angiography in multivessel disease patient |
description |
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. |
publisher |
Sociedade Brasileira de Cardiologia - SBC |
publishDate |
2019 |
url |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0066-782X2019000100040 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT quintellaedgardfreitas clinicaloutcomesandcosteffectivenessanalysisofffrcomparedwithangiographyinmultivesseldiseasepatient AT ferreiraesmeralci clinicaloutcomesandcosteffectivenessanalysisofffrcomparedwithangiographyinmultivesseldiseasepatient AT azevedovitormanuelpereira clinicaloutcomesandcosteffectivenessanalysisofffrcomparedwithangiographyinmultivesseldiseasepatient AT araujodenizarv clinicaloutcomesandcosteffectivenessanalysisofffrcomparedwithangiographyinmultivesseldiseasepatient AT santannafernandomendes clinicaloutcomesandcosteffectivenessanalysisofffrcomparedwithangiographyinmultivesseldiseasepatient AT amorimbernardo clinicaloutcomesandcosteffectivenessanalysisofffrcomparedwithangiographyinmultivesseldiseasepatient AT albuquerquedenilsoncamposde clinicaloutcomesandcosteffectivenessanalysisofffrcomparedwithangiographyinmultivesseldiseasepatient |
_version_ |
1756382107698987008 |