Abstract / Summary
Females with stable coronary artery disease (CAD) often present with less obstructive disease on invasive coronary angiography (ICA) yet experience worse outcomes than males. Coronary computed tomography-derived fractional flow reserve (CT-FFR) guidance improves the physiological assessment of coronary lesions beyond coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA), but its sex-specific clinical impact remains uncertain. This study aimed to investigate sex-based differences in treatment and clinical outcomes between CT-FFR-guided and standard care strategies in patients with stable CAD. In this post hoc subanalysis of the randomised TARGET trial, 1,216 patients with 30-90% coronary stenosis on CCTA were randomised to onsite CT-FFR-guided care or standard care. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who underwent ICA without obstructive CAD or had no intervention despite obstructive CAD on ICA within 90 days of CCTA. The secondary endpoint was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) at 2 years. Females were older than males (62.3±8.1 years vs 58.2±10.7 years; p<0.001) but had comparable anatomical CAD severity. CT-FFR-guided care significantly reduced ICA without obstructive CAD and increased early revascularisation in males but not in females. Over 2 years, CT-FFR-guided management was associated with a significantly lower MACE rate in females compared with standard care (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.48, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.27-0.87; p=0.015), whereas no significant difference was observed in males (adjusted HR 0.89, 95% CI: 0.59-1.33; p=0.574). CT-FFR-guided management was associated with different clinical patterns between females and males. Particularly in males, CT-FFR guidance reduced unnecessary angiography. A lower 2-year adverse event rate was observed among females in the CT-FFR group. However, given the absence of a statistically significant interaction between sex and treatment strategy, these findings should be considered exploratory and hypothesis-generating. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03901326).
Topics
Primary Source
EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology
Ask Prognia AI
Have questions about this randomised trial?
Prognia AI can search this source alongside 35M+ PubMed papers and current ESC, AHA, NICE, and ADA guidelines to give you a fully cited clinical answer.
Related Clinical Guidelines
Related Blog Posts
ESC 2023 Heart Failure Guidelines: What Every Cardiologist Needs to Know
The 2023 focused update to the ESC Heart Failure Guidelines introduced key changes to SGLT2 inhibitor recommendations, HFmrEF management, and device therapy thresholds. Here is a practical summary.
CHADS₂-VASc in Practice: When to Start Anticoagulation in AF
A practical walkthrough of the CHADS₂-VASc scoring system, its ESC guideline thresholds, and how to use it alongside HAS-BLED to counsel patients with atrial fibrillation.