When integrated into lab procedures, measurement of fractional flow reserve (FFR) has been shown to reduce the incidence of adverse events in patients being treated for complex coronary artery disease. Compared to angiography alone, FFR:
- Allows more accurate identification of hemodynamically relevant stenoses, reducing rates of death, myocardial infarction and repeat revascularization by 28%1
- Improves outcomes and patient quality of life
- Lowers procedure and one-year follow-up costs by 14%
- Does not increase procedure time
- Decreases the amount of contrast agent used
The complex lesions evaluated in the FAME Study were successfully and exclusively measured by the St. Jude Medical PressureWire Certus FFR measurement system. Precise measurement of intravascular pressure relies on the market-leading wire that combines exceptional maneuverability–even in tortuous vessels–and reliable readings to ensure access to accurate information in the cath lab.
The FAME study, recently published in The New England Journal of Medicine, shows that routine measurement of FFR in patients with complex coronary artery disease reduces MACE and makes stent placement more efficient and more cost-effective.1
Study Methods
- FAME (FFR versus Angiography for Mutilvessel Evaluation)
- Randomized, prospective study – angiography only or angiography plus FFR
- 20 centers in US and Europe
- 1,005 PCI patients undergoing DES stenting for multivessel disease
One-year Outcomes
Compared to angiography-only procedures, FAME one-year results show that FFR:
- Reduces composite rates of death, myocardial infarction, re-PCI, and CABG at one year by 28%
- Reduces mortality and myocardial infarction at one year by 34%
- Is cost-saving and does not prolong procedure time
- Decreases amount of contrast agent used
Results in similar, if not better, functional status
Two-Year Outcomes
Compared to angiography-only procedures, FAME two-year results show that FFR:
- Reduces mortality and myocardial infarction (combined) at two years by 34%
- Reduces myocardial infarction alone at two years by 37%
- Is cost-saving and improves procedure outcomes
Absolute Difference in MACE-free Survival at One Year
MACE
| Events at One Year, No (%) |
Angio Group N = 496 |
FFR Group N = 509 |
Absolute Difference |
P Value |
| Death, MI and Repeat Vascularization |
91 (18.3) |
67 (13.2) |
24 |
0.02 |
| Death |
15 (3.0) |
9 (1.8) |
6 |
0.19 |
| Death or Myocardial Infarction |
55 (11.1) |
37 (7.3) |
18 |
0.04 |
| Repeat Vascularization |
47 (9.5) |
33 (6.5) |
14 |
0.08 |
| Total No. of MACE |
113 |
76 |
37 |
0.02 |
Two-year Survival Free of Death/MI
1Tonino PA, De Bruyne B, Pijls NH, et al. Fractional low reserve versus angiography for guiding percutaneous coronary intervention. N Engl J Med. 2009;360(3):213-224.
Read more about the FAME study at famestudy.com.