Long-term Effects of Full-Cycle Ratio Assessment and the Decision to Delay Revascularization
Overview
This study evaluates the long-term clinical outcomes of patients with deferred revascularization based on resting full-cycle ratio (RFR) assessment.
Background
Coronary artery disease (CAD) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally, accounting for a significant percentage of cardiovascular-related deaths. The use of physiological assessments like fractional flow reserve (FFR) has been shown to improve clinical outcomes, yet practical application remains limited. Non-hyperemic pressure ratios (NHPRs), such as RFR, offer an alternative that may enhance the assessment of coronary stenoses.
Data Highlights
Parameter
Value
Patient Cohort
773 patients
Lesions Assessed
1012 lesions
Follow-up Duration
2 years
Key Findings
RFR assessment was performed on patients with angiographically intermediate CAD leading to deferred revascularization.
A total of 773 patients and 1012 lesions were included in the analysis.
Long-term outcomes were evaluated to determine the association between RFR values and cardiovascular events.
Current guidelines endorse the use of FFR.
Clinical Implications
The findings suggest that RFR can be a reliable tool for assessing coronary stenosis and making decisions regarding revascularization. Clinicians may consider RFR as a non-invasive alternative to FFR, particularly in patients where hyperemia is a concern.
Conclusion
The study highlights the potential of RFR in guiding clinical decisions for patients with intermediate coronary lesions.
A VHA study across 11 vendors finds AI-generated primary care notes score lower than clinician-written notes, with the largest deficits in thoroughness, organization, and usefulness
