Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Quantitative flow ratio–guided strategy versus angiography-guided strategy for percutaneous coronary intervention: Rationale and design of the FAVOR III China trial

  • for the FAVOR III China Investigators
  • Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences
  • National Centre of Cardiovascular Disease
  • Shanghai Jiao Tong University
  • National Center of Cardiovascular Disease
  • Hospital Clinico San Carlos
  • Stanford University School of Medicine
  • Columbia University Medical Center
  • Cardiovascular Research Foundation
  • National Heart and Lung Institute
  • University of Galway
  • University Hospital of Psychiatry
  • Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai

Research output: Contribution to a Journal (Peer & Non Peer)Articlepeer-review

49 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) is a novel angiography-based approach enabling fast computation of fractional flow reserve without use of pressure wire or adenosine. The objective of this investigator-initiated, multicenter, patient- and clinical assessor-blinded randomized trial is to evaluate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of a QFR-augmented angiography-guided (QFR-guided) strategy versus an angiography-only guided (angiography-guided) strategy for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with coronary artery disease. Methods: Approximately 3,830 patients will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to a QFR-guided or an angiography-guided strategy. Included subjects scheduled for coronary angiography have at least 1 lesion eligible for PCI with 50%-90% stenosis in an artery with ≥2.5 mm reference diameter. Subjects assigned to the QFR-guided strategy will have QFR measured in each interrogated vessel and undergo PCI when QFR ≤0.80, with deferral for lesions with QFR >0.80. Those assigned to the angiography-guided strategy will undergo PCI based on angiography. Optimal medical therapy will be administered to all treated and deferred patients. The primary end point is the 1-year rate of major adverse cardiac events (MACE), a composite of all-cause mortality, any myocardial infarction, or any ischemia-driven revascularization. The major secondary end point is 1-year MACE excluding periprocedural myocardial infarction. Other secondary end points include the individual components of MACE and cost-effectiveness end points. The sample size affords 85% power to demonstrate superiority of QFR guidance compared with angiography guidance. Conclusions: The FAVOR III China study will be the first randomized trial to examine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a QFR-guided versus an angiography-guided PCI strategy in coronary artery disease patients.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)72-80
Number of pages9
JournalAmerican Heart Journal
Volume223
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - May 2020
Externally publishedYes

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

  1. SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being
    SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Quantitative flow ratio–guided strategy versus angiography-guided strategy for percutaneous coronary intervention: Rationale and design of the FAVOR III China trial'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this