Search

Background and Aims Guidelines recommend revascularization of intermediate epicardial artery stenosis to be guided by evidence of ischaemia. Fractional flow reserve (FFR) and instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) are equally recommended. Individual 5-year results of two major randomized trials comparing FFR with iFR-guided revascularization suggested increased all-cause mortality following iFR-guided revascularization. The aim of this study was a study-level meta-analysis of the 5-year outcome data in iFR-SWEDEHEART (NCT02166736) and DEFINE-FLAIR (NCT02053038). Methods Composite of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and its individual components [all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), and unplanned revascularisation] were analysed. Raw Kaplan–Meier estimates, numbers at risk, and number of events were extracted at 5-year follow-up and analysed using the ipdfc package (Stata version 18, StataCorp, College Station, TX, USA). Results In total, iFR and FFR-guided revascularization was performed in 2254 and 2257 patients, respectively. Revascularization was more often deferred in the iFR group [ n = 1128 (50.0%)] vs. the FFR group [ n = 1021 (45.2%); P =.001]. In the iFR-guided group, the number of deaths, MACE, unplanned revascularization, and MI was 188 (8.3%), 484 (21.5%), 235 (10.4%), and 123 (5.5%) vs. 143 (6.3%), 420 (18.6%), 241 (10.7%), and 123 (5.4%) in the FFR group. Hazard ratio [95% confidence interval (CI)] estimates for MACE were 1.18 [1.04; 1.34], all-cause mortality 1.34 [1.08; 1.67], unplanned revascularization 0.99 [0.83; 1.19], and MI 1.02 [0.80; 1.32]. Conclusions Five-year all-cause mortality and MACE rates were increased with revascularization guided by iFR compared to FFR. Rates of unplanned revascularization and MI were equal in the two groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]