Preliminary outcomes of quantitative flow ratio-guided coronary bypass grafting in primary valve surgery: A propensity score weighted analysis

Jiaxi Zhu MD , Yunpeng Zhu MD , Wei Zhang PhD , Zhe Wang MD , Xiaofeng Ye MD, PhD , Mi Zhou MD , Haiqing Li MD , Jiapei Qiu MD , Hong Xu MD , Yanjun Sun MD , Lei Kang RN , Shengxian Tu PhD , Qiang Zhao MD, PhD
{"title":"Preliminary outcomes of quantitative flow ratio-guided coronary bypass grafting in primary valve surgery: A propensity score weighted analysis","authors":"Jiaxi Zhu MD ,&nbsp;Yunpeng Zhu MD ,&nbsp;Wei Zhang PhD ,&nbsp;Zhe Wang MD ,&nbsp;Xiaofeng Ye MD, PhD ,&nbsp;Mi Zhou MD ,&nbsp;Haiqing Li MD ,&nbsp;Jiapei Qiu MD ,&nbsp;Hong Xu MD ,&nbsp;Yanjun Sun MD ,&nbsp;Lei Kang RN ,&nbsp;Shengxian Tu PhD ,&nbsp;Qiang Zhao MD, PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.xjon.2024.06.008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>The guidelines recommend fractional flow reserve-guided coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) during primary valve surgery without evidence. Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) is a novel coronary angiography (CAG)-based fractional flow reserve measurement. We aimed to compare the early clinical outcomes between QFR-guided and CAG-guided CABG in these patients.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>This observational study screened all 2081 patients admitted to our institution for elective primary mitral and/or aortic valve surgery from January 2017 to September 2020. Of them, all 188 patients with comorbid coronary artery lesions (visual estimated stenosis ≥50%) were included. Sixty-nine patients with QFR analysis received bypasses only for lesions with QFR ≤0.80 (QFR-guided group). The remaining 119 patients without QFR analysis received bypasses for all stenosis ≥50% (CAG-guided group). Propensity overlap weighting was used to neutralize the intergroup imbalance. The primary end point was major adverse cardiovascular events.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>After propensity score weighting, the baseline characteristics were comparable. Concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting was performed 58.1% versus 100% in the QFR-guided and CAG-guided groups, respectively. The mean number of grafts was significantly lower in QFR-guided group than in the CAG-guided group (0.9 ± 0.7 vs 1.6 ± 0.5 [<em>P</em> &lt; .001]). The weighted 30-day incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events was numerically lower in the QFR-guided group than in the CAG-guided group, but not statistically significant (6.3% vs 11.8% [<em>P</em> = .429]). After a median follow-up of 31.6 months, the weighted risk of major adverse cardiovascular events and mortality were significantly lower in the QFR-guided group than in the CAG-guided group (major adverse cardiovascular events: hazard ratio, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.24-0.84; <em>P</em> = .012; mortality: hazard ratio, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.16-0.93; <em>P</em> = .029).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Compared with CAG-guided coronary artery bypass grafting, QFR-guided CABG is associated with less grafting and better clinical outcome in primary valve surgery with comorbid coronary artery disease. To confirm this finding, the Quantitative Flow Ratio Guided Revascularization Strategy for Patients Undergoing Primary Valve Surgery With Comorbid Coronary Artery Disease trial (NCT03977129) is ongoing.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":74032,"journal":{"name":"JTCVS open","volume":"21 ","pages":"Pages 90-108"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JTCVS open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666273624001670","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives

The guidelines recommend fractional flow reserve-guided coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) during primary valve surgery without evidence. Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) is a novel coronary angiography (CAG)-based fractional flow reserve measurement. We aimed to compare the early clinical outcomes between QFR-guided and CAG-guided CABG in these patients.

Methods

This observational study screened all 2081 patients admitted to our institution for elective primary mitral and/or aortic valve surgery from January 2017 to September 2020. Of them, all 188 patients with comorbid coronary artery lesions (visual estimated stenosis ≥50%) were included. Sixty-nine patients with QFR analysis received bypasses only for lesions with QFR ≤0.80 (QFR-guided group). The remaining 119 patients without QFR analysis received bypasses for all stenosis ≥50% (CAG-guided group). Propensity overlap weighting was used to neutralize the intergroup imbalance. The primary end point was major adverse cardiovascular events.

Results

After propensity score weighting, the baseline characteristics were comparable. Concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting was performed 58.1% versus 100% in the QFR-guided and CAG-guided groups, respectively. The mean number of grafts was significantly lower in QFR-guided group than in the CAG-guided group (0.9 ± 0.7 vs 1.6 ± 0.5 [P < .001]). The weighted 30-day incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events was numerically lower in the QFR-guided group than in the CAG-guided group, but not statistically significant (6.3% vs 11.8% [P = .429]). After a median follow-up of 31.6 months, the weighted risk of major adverse cardiovascular events and mortality were significantly lower in the QFR-guided group than in the CAG-guided group (major adverse cardiovascular events: hazard ratio, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.24-0.84; P = .012; mortality: hazard ratio, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.16-0.93; P = .029).

Conclusions

Compared with CAG-guided coronary artery bypass grafting, QFR-guided CABG is associated with less grafting and better clinical outcome in primary valve surgery with comorbid coronary artery disease. To confirm this finding, the Quantitative Flow Ratio Guided Revascularization Strategy for Patients Undergoing Primary Valve Surgery With Comorbid Coronary Artery Disease trial (NCT03977129) is ongoing.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
原发性瓣膜手术中定量血流比引导冠状动脉旁路移植术的初步结果:倾向得分加权分析
目的指南推荐在无证据证明的情况下,在初级瓣膜手术期间进行分数血流储备引导下的冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)。定量血流比(QFR)是一种基于冠状动脉造影(CAG)的新型分数血流储备测量方法。我们旨在比较 QFR 引导下和 CAG 引导下 CABG 对这些患者的早期临床疗效。方法这项观察性研究筛查了 2017 年 1 月至 2020 年 9 月期间我院收治的所有 2081 例择期二尖瓣和/或主动脉瓣初级手术患者。其中,所有188例合并冠状动脉病变(目测狭窄≥50%)的患者均纳入研究。69名有QFR分析的患者仅在QFR≤0.80的病变处接受了搭桥手术(QFR引导组)。其余119名未进行QFR分析的患者在所有狭窄程度≥50%的病变处接受搭桥手术(CAG引导组)。采用倾向重叠加权法来中和组间不平衡。主要终点是主要不良心血管事件。结果经过倾向评分加权后,基线特征具有可比性。在QFR引导组和CAG引导组,同时进行冠状动脉旁路移植术的比例分别为58.1%和100%。QFR引导组的平均移植物数量明显低于CAG引导组(0.9 ± 0.7 vs 1.6 ± 0.5 [P<.001])。QFR 引导组的 30 天主要不良心血管事件加权发生率在数量上低于 CAG 引导组,但无统计学意义(6.3% vs 11.8% [P=0.429])。中位随访 31.6 个月后,QFR 引导组的主要不良心血管事件加权风险和死亡率显著低于 CAG 引导组(主要不良心血管事件:危险比,0.45;95% CI,0.24-0.84;P = .结论与 CAG 引导下的冠状动脉旁路移植术相比,QFR 引导下的 CABG 与合并冠状动脉疾病的初级瓣膜手术相关,移植手术更少,临床预后更好。为证实这一发现,正在进行的 "对合并冠状动脉疾病的原发性瓣膜手术患者进行定量血流比引导血管再通策略 "试验(NCT03977129)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Repair of acute type A aortic dissection: The simplest solution is not always the best Are there etiology-specific risk factors for adverse outcomes in patients on Impella 5.5 support? Type B aortic dissection in Marfan patients after the David procedure: Insights from patient-specific simulation Reoperation after aortic root replacement and its impact on long-term survival Should we wait until the morning?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1