Background Post percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) fractional flow reserve (FFR) is a significant predictor of major adverse cardiac events (MACE). The rationale for low post procedural FFR values often remains elusive based on angiographic findings alone, warranting further assessment using an FFR pullback or additional intravascular imaging. It is currently unknown if additional interventions intended to improve the PCI, decrease MACE rates. Study design The FFR REACT trial is a prospective, single-center randomized controlled trial in which 290 patients with a post PCI FFR b0.90 will be randomized (1:1) to either standard of care (no additional intervention) or intravascular ultrasound (IVUS)-directed optimization of the FFR (treatment arm). Eligible patients are those treated with angiographically successful PCI for (un)stable angina or non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (MI). Assuming 45% of patients will have a post PCI FFR b0.90, approximately 640 patients undergoing PCI will need to be enrolled. Patients with a post PCI FFR ≥ 0.90 will be enrolled in a prospective registry. The primary end point is defined as a composite of cardiac death, target vessel MI and clinically driven target vessel revascularisation (target vessel failure) at 1 year. Secondary end points will consist of individual components of the primary end point, procedural success, stent thrombosis and correlations on clinical outcome, changes in post PCI Pd/Pa and FFR and IVUS derived dimensions. All patients will be followed for 3 years. Conclusion The FFR-REACT trial is designed to explore the potential benefit of HD-IVUS-guided PCI optimization in patients with a post PCI FFR b0.90 (Dutch trial register: NTR6711). (Am Heart J 2019;213:66-72.)

Additional Metadata
Persistent URL,
Series VSNU Open Access deal
Journal American Heart Journal
Van Zandvoort, L, Masdjedi, K, Tovar Forero, M.N, Lenzen, M.J, Ligthart, J.M.R, Diletti, R, … Daemen, J. (2019). Fractional flow reserve guided percutaneous coronary intervention optimization directed by high-definition intravascular ultrasound versus standard of care. American Heart Journal, 213, 66–72. doi:10.1016/j.ahj.2019.03.017