定量血流储备分数在经皮冠状动脉介入术中的应用

Comparison of quantitative flow ratio and coronary angiography for evaluating physiological function of coronary lesions

目的探讨定量血流储备分数(quantitative flow ratio,QFR)在冠状动脉狭窄50%~90%病变介入术中的指导价值。方法选取2019年1月—2020年12月在常州市金坛区中医医院行冠状动脉造影(coronary angiography,CAG)检查提示冠脉狭窄在50%~90%的患者120例,随机分为QFR指导组60例(QFR≤0.80行血运重建加药物治疗)和CAG指导组60例(血管狭窄71%~90%行血运重建加药物治疗),比较2组病变情况。进行为期1年的随访,观察主要心血管不良事件(major adverse cardiovascular events,MACE)情况。结果2组患者血管病变比较未见统计学差异(P>0.05);QFR组MACE发生率为3.33%,显著低于CAG组的16.67%(P<0.05)。结论QFR指导的经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(percutaneous coronary intervention,PCI)效果优于CAG指导,可有效降低心血管不良事件发生率。

Objective To investigate the value of quantitative flow ratio fraction(QFR)in the treatment of coronary lesions.Methods 120 patients with coronary lesions who underwent coronary angiography(CAG)in Jintan District traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital of Changzhou City,Jiangsu Province from January 2019 to December 2020 were selected.According to whether they received QFR measurement,they were divided into QFR group(60 cases with QFR≤0.80 underwent revascularization and drug therapy)and CAG group(60 cases with 70%~90%vascular stenosis underwent revascularization and drug therapy).The clinical data and vascular lesions of the two groups were compared.A one-year follow-up was conducted to observe the major adverse cardiovascular events(MACE).Results There was no significant difference in gender,age,hypertension,hyperlipidemia,diabetes,smoking rate and medication between the two groups(P>0.05).There was no significant difference in vascular lesions between the two groups(P>0.05).The incidence of mace in QFR group was 3.33%,which was significantly lower than16.67%in CAG group(P<0.05).Conclusion The decision-making effect of QFR in the treatment is better than that of CAG,which can effectively reduce the incidence of MACE in patients.