# Medically Treated Nonischemic Thin-Cap Fibroatheroma Lesions Versus Fractional Flow Reserve-Guided Complete Revascularization in Diabetic Patients

## TL;DR

This study compares the risk of heart events in diabetic patients with vulnerable plaque versus those who had complete revascularization.

## Contribution

The study introduces a new perspective on managing vulnerable plaque in diabetic patients through preventive revascularization.

## Key findings

- The VP group had a higher occurrence of the primary endpoint compared to the CR group.
- Recurrent event analysis showed significantly higher rates of adverse events in the VP group.
- The findings suggest vulnerable plaque may benefit from preventive revascularization.

## Abstract

Fractional flow reserve (FFR) is an established method to guide decisions on revascularization; however, in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM), FFR-negative lesions carrying an optical coherence tomography-detected thin-cap fibroatheroma (TCFA) remain at high risk for adverse cardiac events.

In this prespecified subanalysis of the COMBINE OCT-FFR trial, DM patients with ≥1 FFR-negative, TCFA-positive medically treated target lesions referred to as vulnerable plaque (VP group), were compared to patients with exclusively FFR-positive target lesions who underwent complete revascularization (CR group). The primary endpoint was first and recurrent event analysis for target lesion failure and the secondary endpoint was a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularization, or hospitalization due to unstable angina.

Among 550 patients enrolled, 98 belonged to the VP group while 93 to the CR group and were followed up to 5 years. The VP group had a higher occurrence of the primary endpoint (20.4% vs 8.6%; HR, 2.22; 95% CI, 0.98-5.04; P = .06). Recurrent event analysis showed that the VP group had significantly higher rates of the primary and secondary endpoints (9.17 vs 3.76 events per 100 PY; RR, 2.44; 95% CI, 1.16-5.60; P = .01 and 13.45 vs 5.63 events per 100 PY; RR, 2.39; 95% CI, 1.30-4.62; P < .01).

In a population with DM, medically treated nonischemic, TCFA-carrying target lesions were associated with higher risk of reoccurring adverse cardiac events compared to target lesions that underwent complete revascularization, opening the discussion about whether a focal preventive revascularization strategy could be contemplated for highly vulnerable lesions.