The Usefulness of Coregistration with iFR in Tandem or Long Diffuse Coronary Lesions: The iLARDI Randomized Clinical Trial

Abstract

Background. Despite technical advancements, patients with sequential or diffuse coronary lesions undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) have an increased risk of cardiovascular events at follow-up. We aimed to analyze the utility of a SyncVision/iFR (S-iFR)-guided PCI strategy versus an angiography-guided strategy in patients with this type of lesions. Methods. Randomized, multicenter, controlled, and open-label trial to compare S-iFR versus angiography-guided PCI in patients with sequential or diffuse angiographic coronary stenosis (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04283734). The primary endpoint was the implanted stent length. The main secondary endpoint was targeting vessel failure (TVF) at one year. Results. A total of 100 patients underwent randomization, with 49 patients assigned to the S-iFR group and 51 to the angiography-guided PCI group. There were no differences between groups regarding clinical and anatomical characteristics. The baseline iFR was 0.71 } 0.16 vs. 0.67 } 0.19 (p = 0.279) in the S-iFR and angiography group, respectively. The mean lesion length was 42.3 } 12 mm and 39.8 } 12 (p = 0.297). The implanted stent length was 32.7 } 17.2 mm in the S-iFR group and 43.1 } 14.9 mm in the angiography group (mean difference, −10.4 mm; 95% confidence interval [CI], −16.9 to −4.0; p = 0.002). At one year, target vessel failure (TVF) occurred in four patients: three (6.1%) in the S-iFR group vs. one (1.9%) in the angiography group (p = 0.319). Conclusions. Among patients with sequential or long diffuse coronary lesions, a S-iFR-guided PCI strategy resulted in a reduction of the total stent length compared to an angiography-guided PCI strategy. A nonsignificant increase in TVF was observed in the S-iFR group.