Coronary Intervention Guided by Quantitative Flow Ratio vs Angiography in Patients With or Without Diabetes.

BACKGROUND:The clinical utility of the quantitative flow ratio (QFR), a novel angiography-based index for the functional assessment of coronary stenoses, has recently been demonstrated in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). OBJECTIVES:This study aimed to ascertain whether the beneficial outcomes of QFR guidance for lesion selection during PCI is affected by diabetes status. METHODS:This substudy from the FAVOR III China trial, in which diabetes was one of the prespecified factors for stratified randomization, compared clinical outcomes of QFR-guided vs angiography-guided PCI lesion selection according to the presence of diabetes. The primary endpoint was the 1-year risk of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or ischemia-driven revascularization). RESULTS:Among 3,825 patients enrolled, 1,295 (33.9%) had diabetes, 347 (26.8%) of whom were treated with insulin. Baseline characteristics were well balanced between treatment arms in both diabetic and nondiabetic patients. Compared with standard angiography-based lesion selection, the QFR-guided strategy consistently reduced the risk of 1-year MACE in both diabetic patients (6.2% vs 9.6%; HR: 0.64; 95% CI: 0.43-0.95) and nondiabetic patients (5.6% vs 8.3%; HR: 0.66; 95% CI: 0.49-0.89) (Pinteraction = 0.88). Among patients in whom PCI was deferred after QFR, the risk of 1-year MACE was similar in patients with and without diabetes (4.5% vs 6.2%; P = 0.51). CONCLUSIONS:A QFR-guided lesion selection strategy improves PCI outcomes compared with standard angiography guidance in patients both with and without diabetes. (The Comparison of Quantitative Flow Ratio Guided and Angiography Guided Percutaneous Intervention in Patients with Coronary Artery Disease [FAVOR III China Study]; NCT03656848).