{"id":"ecff8d041542","type":"article","url":"https://hartvaat.nl/2021/12/01/post-stenting-ffr-versus-angiografie-voor-pci-optimalisatie-target-ffr/","title":"Post-stenting FFR versus angiografie voor PCI-optimalisatie: TARGET-FFR","title_en":"Post-stenting fractional flow reserve vs coronary angiography for optimization of percutaneous coronary intervention (TARGET-FFR).","category":"algemeen","category_label":"Algemeen","professions":["cardioloog"],"tags":[],"journal":"European heart journal","doi":"10.1093/eurheartj/ehab449","source_url":"https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehab449","authors":["Damien Collison","Matthaios Didagelos","Muhammad Aetesam-Ur-Rahman","Samuel Copt","Robert McDade","Peter McCartney","Thomas J Ford","John McClure","Mitchell Lindsay","Aadil Shaukat","Paul Rocchiccioli","Richard Brogan","Stuart Watkins","Margaret McEntegart","Richard Good","Keith Robertson","Patrick O'Boyle","Andrew Davie","Adnan Khan","Stuart Hood","Hany Eteiba","Colin Berry","Keith G Oldroyd"],"significance":7,"published":"2021-12-01","source_date":"2021-12-01","image":"","kennis":["https://hartvaat.nl/kennis/coronairlijden/coronaire-angiografie-hartkatheterisatie/"],"congress":"","summary_en":"The TARGET-FFR trial showed that post-stenting FFR-guided optimization did not significantly improve clinical outcomes compared with angiographic assessment alone, questioning the routine use of FFR to guide stent optimization.","created":"2026-07-03T10:29:32Z","updated":"2026-07-03T13:28:39Z","licence":"Citeer vrij, met bronvermelding en een link naar hartvaat.nl (de url van het record). Samenvattingen zijn redactioneel werk van HartVaat; de oorspronkelijke publicaties blijven van hun uitgevers (doi). Geen medisch advies.","body_markdown":"TARGET-FFR gerandomiseerde trial die post-stenting FFR vergeleek met angiografie voor PCI-optimalisatie.","abstract_original":"AIMS: A fractional flow reserve (FFR) value ≥0.90 after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is associated with a reduced risk of adverse cardiovascular events. TARGET-FFR is an investigator-initiated, single-centre, randomized controlled trial to determine the feasibility and efficacy of a post-PCI FFR-guided optimization strategy vs. standard coronary angiography in achieving final post-PCI FFR values ≥0.90. METHODS AND RESULTS: After angiographically guided PCI, patients were randomized 1:1 to receive a physiology-guided incremental optimization strategy (PIOS) or a blinded coronary physiology assessment (control group). The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with a final post-PCI FFR ≥0.90. Final FFR ≤0.80 was a prioritized secondary outcome. A total of 260 patients were randomized (131 to PIOS, 129 to control) and 68.1% of patients had an initial post-PCI FFR <0.90. In the PIOS group, 30.5% underwent further intervention (stent post-dilation and/or additional stenting). There was no significant difference in the primary endpoint of the proportion of patients with final post-PCI FFR ≥0.90 between groups (PIOS minus control 10%, 95% confidence interval -1.84 to 21.91, P = 0.099). The proportion of patients with a final FFR ≤0.80 was significantly reduced when compared with the angiography-guided control group (-11.2%, 95% confidence interval -21.87 to -0.35], P = 0.045). CONCLUSION: Over two-thirds of patients had a physiologically suboptimal result after angiography-guided PCI. An FFR-guided optimization strategy did not significantly increase the proportion of patients with a final FFR ≥0.90, but did reduce the proportion of patients with a final FFR ≤0.80."}