AimWe assessed the management and outcomes of non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) patients randomly assigned to fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guided management or angiography-guided standard care.Methods and resultsWe conducted a prospective, multicentre, parallel group, 1 : 1 randomized, controlled trial in 350 NSTEMI patients with ≥1 coronary stenosis ≥30% of the lumen diameter assessed visually (threshold for FFR measurement) (NCT01764334). Enrolment took place in six UK hospitals from October 2011 to May 2013. Fractional flow reserve was disclosed to the operator in the FFR-guided group (n = 176). Fractional flow reserve was measured but not disclosed in the angiography-guided group (n = 174). Fractional flow reserve ≤0.80 was an indication for revascularization by percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG). The median (IQR) time from the index episode of myocardial ischaemia to angiography was 3 (2, 5) days. For the primary outcome, the proportion of patients treated initially by medical therapy was higher in the FFR-guided group than in the angiography-guided group [40 (22.7%) vs. 23 (13.2%), difference 95% (95% CI: 1.4%, 17.7%), P = 0.022]. Fractional flow reserve disclosure resulted in a change in treatment between medical therapy, PCI or CABG in 38 (21.6%) patients. At 12 months, revascularization remained lower in the FFR-guided group [79.0 vs. 86.8%, difference 7.8% (−0.2%, 15.8%), P = 0.054]. There were no statistically significant differences in health outcomes and quality of life between the groups.ConclusionIn NSTEMI patients, angiography-guided management was associated with higher rates of coronary revascularization compared with FFR-guided management. A larger trial is necessary to assess health outcomes and cost-effectiveness.

Mortality rates following PPCI were higher in elderly patients although remained acceptable. Invasively measured shock index before PPCI is the strongest independent predictor of long-term outcome in elderly patients. In addition, predictors of in-hospital mortality were similar across different age groups but differed significantly in relation to longer-term mortality.

This study confirms that the current evidence demonstrates superiority of Embospheres over spherical PVA but no reported differences in outcomes between any of the other agents. Comparison of embolic agents was limited by lack of RCT data and further research is warranted.

A prospective study to assess the accuracy of ultrasound in the detection and localization of foreign bodies of the extremities was undertaken. Forty-five patients with clinical suspicion of foreign bodies were included in the study. Among 20 patients with radio-opaque foreign bodies, ultrasonic detection of foreign bodies was achieved in 19 patients. In 25 patients, with no radiographic evidence of foreign body, ultrasonic detection of foreign bodies was made in seven patients and among these foreign bodies were confirmed and removed at surgery in five patients. Accurate pre-operative ultrasonic localization of foreign bodies was carried out in three patients.

BackgroundIn patients with acute non–ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), coronary arteriography is usually recommended; but visual interpretation of the angiogram is subjective. We hypothesized that functional assessment of coronary stenosis severity with a pressure-sensitive guide wire (fractional flow reserve [FFR]) would have additive diagnostic, clinical, and health economic utility as compared with angiography-guided standard care.Methods and designA prospective multicenter parallel-group 1:1 randomized controlled superiority trial in 350 NSTEMI patients with ≥1 coronary stenosis ≥30% severity (threshold for FFR measurement) will be conducted. Patients will be randomized immediately after coronary angiography to the FFR-guided group or angiography-guided group. All patients will then undergo FFR measurement in all vessels with a coronary stenosis ≥30% severity including culprit and nonculprit lesions. Fractional flow reserve will be disclosed to guide treatment in the FFR-guided group but not disclosed in the “angiography-guided” group. In the FFR-guided group, an FFR ≤0.80 will be an indication for revascularization by percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass surgery, as appropriate. The primary outcome is the between-group difference in the proportion of patients allocated to medical management only compared with revascularization. Secondary outcomes include the occurrence of cardiac death or hospitalization for myocardial infarction or heart failure, quality of life, and health care costs. The minimum and average follow-up periods for the primary analysis are 6 and 18 months, respectively.ConclusionsOur developmental clinical trial will address the feasibility of FFR measurement in NSTEMI and the influence of FFR disclosure on treatment decisions and health and economic outcomes.