Using a resting heart pressure test to guide bypass surgery planning
Compares a resting pressure test with angiography to guide bypass surgery in coronary artery disease.
Plain-language title generated from the registry record
Registry title: Resting Full-cycle Flow Ratio (RFR) Versus Angiography to Guide Revascularization Strategy in Patients Undergoing Coronary Artery By-pass Grafting (CABG)
Key facts
- Where
- Banská Bystrica, SlovakiaSee the site
Where in Slovakia
- SÚSCCHBanská Bystrica, SlovakiaTaking people
Questions to ask the study team
- How often do I need to come in, and for how long each time?
- Are travel costs paid?
- Can I keep my own doctor?
- What happens if I want to stop?
Trial details
- Who runs it
- Diagram B.V.
- Trial code
- NCT04375306
- Record updated
- 1 February 2024
- Original description
Different trials have shown that fractional flow reserve (FFR) could successfully guide revascularization in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).Read full original descriptionShow less
Resting Full-cycle Flow Ratio (RFR) Versus Angiography to Guide Revascularization Strategy in Patients Undergoing Coronary Artery By-pass Grafting (CABG): RFR-CABG Trial
Different trials have shown that fractional flow reserve (FFR) could successfully guide revascularization in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).
It is conceivable that a similar revascularization guidance could be useful also for surgical revascularization i.e. coronary by-pass graft (CABG). Experience learns that grafts placed on vessels with hemodynamically non-significant stenosis often occlude due to competitive antegrade flow.
Resting full-cycle Flow Ratio (RFR) is a measurement performed to evaluate the hemodynamic severity of coronary stenosis. Differently from FFR which is a measurement performed in maximal hyperemia, the RFR is a measurement that is performed in rest and therefore may predict better than FFR the baseline equilibriums that could lead to graft failure, while it has similar capacity to identify hemodynamically significant stenosis as FFR. It is unknown whether RFR guided CABG revascularization is superior as compared to angiography alone.
Inclusion: All patients between 18 or older undergoing CABG; Patients willing and capable to provide written informed consent.
Exclusion: Previous CABG; Concomitant severe valvular disease intervention; Known transmural myocardial infarction; Documented microvascular disease; Left ventricular ejection fraction <30%; Life expectancy <2 years; Remaining (expected) coronary stenosis of > 50% diameter stenosis distally to graft anastomosis; RFR/FFR measurement judged impossible; Participation in other investigational clinical trials.