Study Design of the Graft Patency After FFR-Guided Versus Angiography-Guided CABG Trial (GRAFFITI).

Details

Serval ID
serval:BIB_53DA4F305D64
Type
Article: article from journal or magazin.
Collection
Publications
Institution
Title
Study Design of the Graft Patency After FFR-Guided Versus Angiography-Guided CABG Trial (GRAFFITI).
Journal
Journal of cardiovascular translational research
Author(s)
Toth G.G., De Bruyne B., Kala P., Ribichini F.L., Casselman F., Ramos R., Piroth Z., Fournier S., Van Mieghem C., Penicka M., Mates M., Van Praet F., Degriek I., Barbato E.
ISSN
1937-5395 (Electronic)
ISSN-L
1937-5387
Publication state
Published
Issued date
08/2018
Peer-reviewed
Oui
Volume
11
Number
4
Pages
269-273
Language
english
Notes
Publication types: Journal Article ; Multicenter Study ; Randomized Controlled Trial ; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Publication Status: ppublish
Abstract
Clinical benefit of invasive functionally guided revascularization has been mostly investigated and proven for percutaneous coronary intervention. It has never been prospectively evaluated whether a systematic fractional flow reserve (FFR) assessment is also beneficial in guiding coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG). The objective of the GRAft patency after FFR-guided versus angiography-guIded CABG (GRAFFITI) trial was to compare an FFR-guided revascularization strategy to the traditional angiography-guided revascularization strategy for patients undergoing CABG. Patients were enrolled with significantly diseased left anterior descending or left main stem and at least one major coronary artery with angiographically intermediate stenosis (30-90% diameter stenosis) that was assessed by FFR. Thereafter, while the FFR values were kept concealed, cardiac surgeons decided their intended procedural strategy based on the coronary angiography alone. At this point, patients underwent 1:1 randomization to either an FFR-guided or an angiography-guided CABG strategy. In case the patient was randomized to angiography-guided arm, cardiac surgeons kept their intended procedural strategy, i.e., CABG was guided solely on the basis of the coronary angiography. In case the patient was randomized to the FFR-guided arm, FFR values were disclosed to the surgeons who revised the surgical protocol according to the functional significance of each coronary stenosis. The primary endpoint of the trial was the rate of graft occlusion at 12 months, assessed by coronary computed tomography or coronary angiography. The secondary endpoints were (1) length of postoperative hospital stay; (2) changes in surgical strategy depending upon FFR results (in FFR-guided group only); and (3) rate of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events, i.e., composite of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and any revascularization during the follow-up period. This study is the first prospective randomized trial investigating potential clinical benefits, associated with FFR-guided surgical revascularization.
NCT01810224.
Keywords
Blood Vessel Prosthesis, Coronary Angiography/methods, Coronary Artery Bypass/methods, Coronary Artery Disease/diagnosis, Coronary Artery Disease/physiopathology, Coronary Artery Disease/surgery, Coronary Vessels/diagnostic imaging, Coronary Vessels/physiopathology, Coronary Vessels/surgery, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Fractional Flow Reserve, Myocardial/physiology, Humans, Male, Prospective Studies, Single-Blind Method, Surgery, Computer-Assisted/methods, Treatment Outcome, Vascular Patency, Coronary angiography, Coronary artery bypass graft surgery, Fractional flow reserve, Graft patency
Pubmed
Web of science
Create date
26/08/2019 17:45
Last modification date
27/08/2019 6:26
Usage data