FFR-Guided PCI Shows Benefit in TAVI Patients with Intermediate CAD: The FAITAVI trial(EuroPCR 2025)

To determine whether fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guided management improves clinical outcomes compared with angiography-guided revascularisation in stable TAVI patients the Functional Assessment In TAVI (FAITAVI) trial1 enrolled 320 patients who were randomised 1:1 between FFR-guided PCI and angiography-guided PCI.

In the angio-guided arm all lesions ≥50% in a vessel >2.5 mm were treated while in the physiology-guided arm lesions with FFR ≤0.80 were treated and >0.85 were deferred. For all FFR values between 0.81 and 0.85, repeating the measurement after TAVI implantation was recommended as FFR can change due to improved hyperaemic coronary flow after TAVI.

The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) at 12-months follow-up including all-cause death, myocardial infarction, ischaemia-driven target vessel revascularisation, disabling stroke or major bleeding.

The mean age – 86 years – and low SYNTAX scores – a median of 7 – was similar between the two groups.

FFR-guided PCI was associated with a lower rate of MACCE at 12-month follow-up in patients with intermediate CAD undergoing TAVI.

The primary endpoint occurred in 14 (8.5%) in the FFR-guided PCI group and in 25 patients (16.0%) in the angiography-guided PCI group, a finding primarily driven by lower rates of any-cause death and ischaemia-driven target vessel revascularisation.

These findings are of particular interest when facing the clinical challenges of managing a bystander coronary lesion identified during diagnostic evaluation for a valve intervention especially as CAD is present in over 50% of patients undergoing TAVI.

The recent NOTION-3 study demonstrated in patients with CAD undergoing TAVI that PCI was associated with a lower risk of events (any cause death, MI or revascularisation) at 2 years when compared with conservative treatment. However, unlike the NOTION-3 study2, the FAITAVI trial focused on intermediate coronary lesions, while angiographically severe lesions (DS >90%) were excluded. Furthermore, the study compared angiography vs physiology guidance and did not include an arm for conservative treatment.

The FAITAVI trial hypothesised that the management of coronary lesions according to their functional significance could be beneficial in the decision-making process of TAVI candidates with concomitant, stable CAD. The risk of a MACCE was significantly lower in patients allocated to the physiology-guided PCI strategy, mainly driven by a lower risk of death from any cause and ischaemia-driven TVR, further highlighting the potential advantages of FFR-guided PCI in patients undergoing complex interventions, including TAVI.

In the first study comparing FFR-guided PCI to angiography-guided PCI in patients with intermediate coronary artery disease and severe symptomatic aortic stenosis undergoing TAVI, FFR-guided PCI resulted in a lower rate of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) at 12 months. These findings may influence clinical decision-making, though further research is needed to explore the long-term benefits of functionally guided revascularization versus conservative treatment in this patient population.

Reference:

EuroPCR 2025 – The FAITAVI trial: angiography versus physiology-guided PCI in patients undergoing TAVI – 12-month follow-up data, PCR, Meeting: EuroPCR.