Clinical Outcomes of patients with coronary artery disease who underwent FFR evaluation of intermediate coronary lesionS– COFFRS study

Background We undertook this study to validate the impact of FFR-guided coronary interventions among Indian patients, which is not readily available as of date. Our patients differ from their western counterparts, both in terms of risk profile (younger, more metabolic syndrome, lipid rich diet) as well as their coronary size. Methods We retrospectively evaluated 282 patients with intermediate stenosis in their coronary arteries, who underwent FFR to assess the functional severity of the lesion. There were 3 groups: Group 1–FFR > 0.8 and kept on medical follow-up; Group 2–FFR ≤ 0.8 and underwent revascularisation; and Group 3–FFR ≤ 0.8 and refused to undergo revascularization. 281(99.6%) patients had regular follow-up in our clinic. Results Median age-57 years (range = 28–78). Males = 230, 90 patients were in Group 1, 175 in group 2 (PCI in 144 & CABG in 31) and 17 in group 3. Median follow-up of patients was 17.9 months (2 to 56 months). Three patients(3.4%) in Group 1 had MACE (1 STEMI, 2 UA); 4 patients (2.3%) in Group 2 had Non-STE-ACS; 7 patients (41%) in Group 3 had MACE (3 deaths with acute LVF, 2 NSTEMI, 2 STEMI) Conclusion In our experience, MACE events were not higher in patients with FFR > 0.8 and kept under medical therapy and were similarly lower in patients with FFR ≤0.8 and underwent revascularisation (p = 0.73). Also MACE events were higher in patients with FFR ≤ 0.8 and did not undergo revascularisation compared to other two appropriately treated groups (p = 0.03). FFR based revascularization decision appears to be a safe strategy in Indian patients.