Background-Penetration of fractional flow reserve (FFR) in clinical practice varies extensively, and the applicability of results from randomized trials is understudied. We describe the extent to which the information gained from routine FFR affects patient management strategy and clinical outcome. Methods and Results-Nonselected patients undergoing coronary angiography, in which at least 1 lesion was interrogated by FFR, were prospectively enrolled in a multicenter registry. FFR-driven change in management strategy (medical therapy, revascularization, or additional stress imaging) was assessed per-lesion and per-patient, and the agreement between final and initial strategies was recorded. Cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or unplanned revascularization (MACE) at 1 year was recorded. A total of 1293 lesions were evaluated in 918 patients (mean FFR, 0.81±0.1). Management plan changed in 406 patients (44.2%) and 584 lesions (45.2%). One-year MACE was 6.9%; patients in whom all lesions were deferred had a lower MACE rate (5.3%) than those with at least 1 lesion revascularized (7.3%) or left untreated despite FFR≤0.80 (13.6%; log-rank P=0.014). At the lesion level, deferral of those with an FFR≤0.80 was associated with a 3.1-fold increase in the hazard of cardiovascular death/myocardial infarction/target lesion revascularization (P=0.012). Independent predictors of target lesion revascularization in the deferred lesions were proximal location of the lesion, B2/C type and FFR. Conclusions-Routine FFR assessment of coronary lesions safely changes management strategy in almost half of the cases. Also, it accurately identifies patients and lesions with a low likelihood of events, in which revascularization can be safely deferred, as opposed to those at high risk when ischemic lesions are left untreated, thus confirming results from randomized trials. Clinical Trial Registration-URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01835808. Results from the FAME 2 (Fractional Flow Reserve Versus Angiography for Multivessel Evaluation 2) study suggested that deferring the revascularization of epicardial stenosis with an FFR≤0.80 was associated with an 11.4% absolute increase in the risk of major cardiovascular events at 24 months (8.1% in revascularized patients versus 19.5% in medically treated), an hazard that was mainly driven by urgent revascularization. 4In spite of the overwhelming evidence of its potential clinical and economic benefits 5 and strong guideline recommendation, 6 the adoption of FFR in the real-world is perceived to vary significantly. Reasons for this disparity are several, but most operators still do rely the most on angiographic eyeballing to decide on the functional significance of coronary lesions and the need for revascularization. 7The Portuguese Study on the Evaluation of FFR-Guided Treatment of Coronary Disease (POST-IT) was a prospective registry designed to describe the patterns of the use of FFR in an unselected real-world population, to assess its impact on clinical decis...

Coronary artery anomalies (CAAs) are a rare entity but their true incidence in the general population has yet to be determined. Most CAAs are asymptomatic, but they are nevertheless the second leading cause of sudden death in apparently healthy young athletes. The new imaging methods available to cardiologists, including CT angiography and MRI, now enable noninvasive diagnosis and characterization of these anomalies. The authors review the literature and present a retrospective study of 360 consecutive patients who underwent cardiac CT angiography. Demographic, clinical and angiographic characteristics were studied. The incidence of CAAs in this population was 2.69%. In order to better characterize this disorder, including diagnostic strategy, screening, treatment and prognosis, the authors suggest the establishment of a national registry of cardiac CT angiography. Such a registry would fill the existing gap in information on exams performed in the country, enriching current knowledge about this disease and noninvasive cardiac imaging in Portugal.

IMPORTANCE Approximately one-third of patients considered for coronary revascularization have diabetes, which is a major determinant of clinical outcomes, often influencing the choice of the revascularization strategy. The usefulness of fractional flow reserve (FFR) to guide treatment in this population is understudied and has been questioned. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the usefulness and rate of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) of integrating FFR in management decisions for patients with diabetes who undergo coronary angiography. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This cross-sectional study used data from the PRIME-FFR study derived from the merger of the POST-IT study (Portuguese Study on the Evaluation of FFR-Guided Treatment of Coronary Disease [March 2012-November 2013]) and R3F study (French Study of FFR Integrated Multicenter Registries Implementation of FFR in Routine Practice [October 2008-June 2010]), 2 prospective multicenter registries that shared a common design. A population of all-comers for whom angiography disclosed ambiguous lesions was analyzed for rates, patterns, and outcomes associated with management reclassification, including revascularization deferral, in patients with vs without diabetes. Data analysis was performed from June to August 2018. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Death from any cause, myocardial infarction, or unplanned revascularization (MACE) at 1 year. RESULTS Among 1983 patients (1503 [77%] male; mean [SD] age, 65 [10] years), 701 had diabetes, and FFR was performed for 1.4 lesions per patient (58.2% of lesions in the left anterior descending artery; mean [SD] stenosis, 56% [11%]; mean [SD] FFR, 0.81 [0.01]). Reclassification by FFR was high and similar in patients with and without diabetes (41.2% vs 37.5%, P = .13), but reclassification from medical treatment to revascularization was more frequent in the former (142 of 342 [41.5%] vs 230 of 730 [31.5%], P = .001). There was no statistical difference between the 1-year rates of MACE in reclassified (9.7%) and nonreclassified patients (12.0%) (P = .37). Among patients with diabetes, FFR-based deferral identified patients with a lower risk of MACE at 12 months (25 of 296 [8.4%]) compared with those undergoing revascularization (47 of 257 [13.1%]) (P = .04), and the rate was of the same magnitude of the observed rate among deferred patients without diabetes (7.9%, P = .87). Status of insulin treatment had no association with outcomes. Patients (6.6% of the population) in whom FFR was disregarded had the highest MACE rates regardless of diabetes status. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Routine integration of FFR for the management of coronary artery disease in patients with diabetes may be associated with a high rate of treatment reclassification. Management strategies guided by FFR, including revascularization deferral, may be useful for patients with diabetes.

No abstract

Our results suggest that both first-generation and second-generation DES seem to be similarly effective in patients undergoing a percutaneous coronary intervention in the setting of acute coronary syndromes. However, newer second-generation devices may offer potential advantages because of a significantly lower incidence of ARC-definite ST.