| 1. |
- Andersen, Birgitte Krogsgaard, et al.
(författare)
-
Quantitative flow ratio versus fractional flow reserve for guiding percutaneous coronary intervention: design and rationale of the randomised FAVOR III Europe Japan trial.
- 2023
-
Ingår i: EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology. - 1969-6213.
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) is a computation of fractional flow reserve (FFR) based on invasive coronary angiographic images. Calculating QFR is less invasive than measuring FFR and may be associated with lower costs. Current evidence supports the call for an adequately powered randomised comparison of QFR and FFR for the evaluation of intermediate coronary stenosis. The aim of the FAVOR III Europe Japan trial is to investigate if a QFR-based diagnostic strategy yields a non-inferior 12-month clinical outcome compared with a standard FFR-guided strategy in the evaluation of patients with intermediary coronary stenosis. FAVOR III Europe Japan is an investigator-initiated, randomised, clinical outcome, non-inferiority trial scheduled to randomise 2,000 patients with either 1) stable angina pectoris and intermediate coronary stenosis, or 2) indications for functional assessment of at least 1 non-culprit lesion after acute myocardial infarction. Up to 40 international centres will randomise patients to either a QFR-based or a standard FFR-based diagnostic strategy. The primary endpoint of major adverse cardiovascular events is a composite of all-cause mortality, any myocardial infarction, and any unplanned coronary revascularisation at 12 months. QFR could emerge as an adenosine- and wire-free alternative to FFR, making the functional evaluation of intermediary coronary stenosis less invasive and more cost-effective.
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Byrne, Robert A., et al.
(författare)
-
Report of a European Society of Cardiology-European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions task force on the evaluation of coronary stents in Europe : executive summary
- 2015
-
Ingår i: European Heart Journal. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0195-668X .- 1522-9645. ; 36:38, s. 2608-2620
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The evaluation for European Union market approval of coronary stents falls under the Medical Device Directive that was adopted in 1993. Specific requirements for the assessment of coronary stents are laid out in supplementary advisory documents. In response to a call by the European Commission to make recommendations for a revision of the advisory document on the evaluation of coronary stents (Appendix 1 of MEDDEV 2.7.1), the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) established a Task Force to develop an expert advisory report. As basis for its report, the ESC-EAPCI Task Force reviewed existing processes, established a comprehensive list of all coronary drug-eluting stents that have received a CE mark to date, and undertook a systematic review of the literature of all published randomized clinical trials evaluating clinical and angiographic outcomes of coronary artery stents between 2002 and 2013. Based on these data, the TF provided recommendations to inform a new regulatory process for coronary stents. The main recommendations of the task force include implementation of a standardized non-clinical assessment of stents and a novel clinical evaluation pathway for market approval. The two-stage clinical evaluation plan includes recommendation for an initial pre-market trial with objective performance criteria (OPC) benchmarking using invasive imaging follow-up leading to conditional CE-mark approval and a subsequent mandatory, large-scale randomized trial with clinical endpoint evaluation leading to unconditional CE-mark. The data analysis from the systematic review of the Task Force may provide a basis for determination of OPC for use in future studies. This paper represents an executive summary of the Task Force's report.
|
|
| 4. |
- Byrne, Robert A, et al.
(författare)
-
Report of an ESC-EAPCI Task Force on the evaluation and use of bioresorbable scaffolds for percutaneous coronary intervention : executive summary
- 2018
-
Ingår i: European Heart Journal. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0195-668X .- 1522-9645. ; 39:18, s. 1591-1601
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- A previous Task Force of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) provided a report on recommendations for the non-clinical and clinical evaluation of coronary stents. Following dialogue with the European Commission, the Task Force was asked to prepare an additional report on the class of devices known as bioresorbable scaffolds (BRS). Five BRS have CE-mark approval for use in Europe. Only one device-the Absorb bioresorbable vascular scaffold-has published randomized clinical trial data and this data show inferior outcomes to conventional drug-eluting stents (DES) at 2-3 years. For this reason, at present BRS should not be preferred to conventional DES in clinical practice. The Task Force recommends that new BRS devices should undergo systematic non-clinical testing according to standardized criteria prior to evaluation in clinical studies. A clinical evaluation plan should include data from a medium sized, randomized trial against DES powered for a surrogate end point of clinical efficacy. Manufacturers of successful devices receive CE-mark approval for use and must have an approved plan for a large-scale randomized clinical trial with planned long-term follow-up.
|
|
| 5. |
- Byrne, Robert A., et al.
(författare)
-
Report of an ESC-EAPCI Task Force on the evaluation and use of bioresorbable scaffolds for percutaneous coronary intervention : executive summary
- 2018
-
Ingår i: EuroIntervention. - : EUROPA EDITION. - 1774-024X .- 1969-6213. ; 13:13, s. 1574-1586
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- A previous Task Force of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) provided a report on recommendations for the non-clinical and clinical evaluation of coronary stents. Following dialogue with the European Commission, the Task Force was asked to prepare an additional report on the class of devices known as bioresorbable scaffolds (BRS). Five BRS have CE-mark approval for use in Europe. Only one device - the Absorb bioresorbable vascular scaffold - has published randomized clinical trial data and this data show inferior outcomes to conventional drug-eluting stents (DES) at 2-3 years. For this reason, at present BRS should not be preferred to conventional DES in clinical practice. The Task Force recommends that new BRS devices should undergo systematic non-clinical testing according to standardized criteria prior to evaluation in clinical studies. A clinical evaluation plan should include data from a medium sized, randomized trial against DES powered for a surrogate end point of clinical efficacy. Manufacturers of successful devices receive CE-mark approval for use and must have an approved plan for a large-scale randomized clinical trial with planned long-term follow-up.
|
|
| 6. |
- Johnson, Thomas W., et al.
(författare)
-
Clinical use of intracoronary imaging. Part 2 : acute coronary syndromes, ambiguous coronary angiography findings, and guiding interventional decision-making: an expert consensus document of the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions
- 2019
-
Ingår i: European Heart Journal. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0195-668X .- 1522-9645. ; 40:31, s. 2566-2584
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This consensus document is the second of two reports summarizing the views of an expert panel organized by the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) on the clinical use of intracoronary imaging including intravascular ultrasound (IVUS), optical coherence tomography (OCT), and near infrared spectroscopy (NIRS)-IVUS. Beyond guidance of stent selection and optimization of deployment, invasive imaging facilitates angiographic interpretation and may guide treatment in acute coronary syndrome. Intravascular imaging can provide additional important diagnostic information when confronted with angiographically ambiguous lesions and allows assessment of plaque morphology enabling identification of vulnerability characteristics. This second document focuses on useful imaging features to identify culprit and vulnerable coronary plaque, which offers the interventional cardiologist guidance on when to adopt an intracoronary imaging-guided approach to the treatment of coronary artery disease and provides an appraisal of intravascular imaging-derived metrics to define the haemodynamic significance of coronary lesions.
|
|
| 7. |
- Kristensen, Steen D., et al.
(författare)
-
Reperfusion therapy for ST elevation acute myocardial infarction 2010/2011 : current status in 37 ESC countries
- 2014
-
Ingår i: European Heart Journal. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0195-668X .- 1522-9645. ; 35:29, s. 1957-1970
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Aims Primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) is the preferred reperfusion therapy in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). We conducted this study to evaluate the contemporary status on the use and type of reperfusion therapy in patients admitted with STEMI in the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) member countries. Methods and results A cross-sectional descriptive study based on aggregated country-level data on the use of reperfusion therapy in patients admitted with STEMI during 2010 or 2011. Thirty-seven ESC countries were able to provide data from existing national or regional registries. In countries where no such registries exist, data were based on best expert estimates. Data were collected on the use of STEMI reperfusion treatment and mortality, the numbers of cardiologists, and the availability of PPCI facilities in each country. Our survey provides a brief data summary of the degree of variation in reperfusion therapy across Europe. The number of PPCI procedures varied between countries, ranging from 23 to 884 per million inhabitants. Primary percutaneous coronary intervention and thrombolysis were the dominant reperfusion strategy in 33 and 4 countries, respectively. The mean population served by a single PPCI centre with a 24-h service 7 days a week ranged from 31 300 inhabitants per centre to 6 533 000 inhabitants per centre. Twenty-seven of the total 37 countries participated in a former survey from 2007, and major increases in PPCI utilization were observed in 13 of these countries. Conclusion Large variations in reperfusion treatment are still present across Europe. Countries in Eastern and Southern Europe reported that a substantial number of STEMI patients are not receiving any reperfusion therapy. Implementation of the best reperfusion therapy as recommended in the guidelines should be encouraged.
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
