Fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guided percutaneous coronary intervention has shown favorable long-term clinical outcomes. However, limited data exist evaluating the FFR assessment among the chronic kidney disease (CKD) population. The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term clinical outcomes of FFR-guided coronary revascularization in patients with CKD. A total of 242 CKD patients who underwent FFR assessment were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were divided into two groups: revascularization (FFR ≤ 0.80) and non-revascularization (FFR > 0.80). The primary endpoint was the composite of cardiac death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and target vessel failure (TVF). The key secondary endpoint was TVF. The Cox regression model was used for risk evaluation. With 91% of the ischemic vessels revascularized, the revascularization group had higher risks for both the primary endpoint (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 2.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.07–3.97; p = 0.030) and key secondary endpoint (aHR: 2.19, 95% CI: 1.10–4.37; p = 0.026), during a median follow-up of 2.9 years. This result was consistent among different CKD severities. In patients with CKD, functional ischemia in coronary artery stenosis was associated with poor clinical outcomes despite coronary revascularization.

Maximal hyperaemia for fractional flow reserve (FFR) may not be achieved with the current recommended doses of intracoronary adenosine. Higher doses (up to 720 μg) have been reported to optimize hyperaemic stimuli in small dose-response studies. Real-world data from a large cohort of patients is needed to evaluate FFR results and the safety of high-dose escalation. This is a retrospective study aimed to evaluate the safety and frequency of FFR ≤0.8 after high-dose escalation of intracoronary adenosine. Data were extracted from the medical databases of two university hospitals. Increasing doses (100, 200, 400, 600, and 800 μg) of adenosine were administered as intracoronary boluses until FFR ≤0.8 was achieved or heart block developed. The percentage of FFR ≤0.8 after higher-dose escalation was compared with those at conventional doses, and the predictors for FFR ≤0.8 after higher doses were analysed. In the 1163 vessels of 878 patients, 402 vessels (34.6%) achieved FFR ≤0.8 at conventional doses and 623 vessels (53.6%) received high-dose escalation. An additional 84 vessels (13.5%) achieved FFR ≤0.8 after high-dose escalation. No major complications developed during high-dose escalation. Borderline FFR (0.81–0.85) at the conventional dose, stenosis >60%, and triple-vessel disease increased the likelihood of FFR ≤0.8 after high-dose escalation, but chronic kidney disease decreased it. For vessels of borderline FFR at conventional doses, 46% achieved FFR ≤0.8 after high-dose escalation. In conclusion, High-dose escalation of intracoronary adenosine increases the frequency of FFR ≤0.8 without major complications. It could be especially feasible for borderline FFR values near the 0.8 diagnostic threshold.

BACKGROUND Diabetic retinopathy (DR) and age-related macular degeneration (AMD) are two of the leading causes of vision loss worldwide. As population aging and diabetes prevalence increase, timely detection of these conditions has become essential. However, limited professionalism and insufficient training of ophthalmic screening in general medicine physicians may lead to delayed diagnosis and treatment. Artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted diagnostic tools may help to improve the screening of DR and AMD in the routine clinical practice. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of AI-assisted fundus imaging for DR and AMD screening in adults with diabetes and older adults at risk of macular degeneration. METHODS This multicenter, two-arm, parallel-group, open-label, individual-level randomized controlled trial and patient recruitment is performed at the settings of Family Medicine and Geriatric and Gerontology Care over four medical centers in Taiwan. Eligibility includes (1) diabetic individuals aged 20 years or more for DR screening, and (2) individuals aged 50 years or more for AMD screening. The study protocol has been approved by the ethics committees of all participating hospitals, and all participants will provide written informed consent. RESULTS The study was funded in September 2024, began on October 2, 2025, and is expected to be completed in December 2027. After the pilot implementation phase without randomization, participants will be randomized 1:1 into two groups: (1) AI-assisted screening and (2) usual physician-only screening. The primary outcomes included the detection rates (defined as participants with confirmed DR or AMD among all screened participants) and the positive predictive values (defined as participants with confirmed DR or AMD among those who tested positive). Cost-effectiveness analyses will be performed using data derived from the trial results. CONCLUSIONS This study will provide robust evidence on the effectiveness of AI-assisted ophthalmic screening in improving patient eye health outcomes through timely screening and accurate early detection. This strategy may be cost-effective. CLINICALTRIAL ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT07069647

Background: Diabetic retinopathy (DR) and age-related macular degeneration (AMD) are 2 of the leading causes of vision loss worldwide. As population aging and diabetes prevalence increase, timely detection of these conditions has become essential. However, limited professionalism and insufficient training in ophthalmic screening among general medicine physicians may lead to delayed diagnosis and treatment. Artificial intelligence (AI)–assisted diagnostic tools may help to improve the screening of DR and AMD in routine clinical practice. Objective: This study aims to evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of AI-assisted fundus imaging for DR and AMD screening in adults with diabetes and older adults at risk of macular degeneration. Methods: This multicenter, 2-arm, parallel-group, open-label, individual-level randomized controlled trial and patient recruitment are performed at the settings of Family Medicine and Geriatric and Gerontology Care over 4 medical centers in Taiwan. Eligibility includes (1) diabetic individuals aged ≥20 years for DR screening, and (2) individuals aged ≥50 years for AMD screening. The study protocol has been approved by the ethics committees of all participating hospitals, and all participants will provide written informed consent. Results: The study was funded in September 2024, began on October 2, 2025, and is expected to be completed in December 2027. After the pilot implementation phase without randomization, participants will be randomized 1:1 into two groups: (1) AI-assisted screening, and (2) usual physician-only screening. The primary outcomes will include the detection rates (defined as participants with confirmed DR or AMD among all screened participants) and the positive predictive values (defined as participants with confirmed DR or AMD among those who tested positive). Cost-effectiveness analyses will be performed using data derived from the trial results. Conclusions: This study will provide robust evidence on the effectiveness of AI-assisted ophthalmic screening in improving patient eye health outcomes through timely screening and accurate early detection. This strategy may be cost-effective.

Beta-blockers are widely used, but the benefit is now challenged in patients at risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) in the present coronary reperfusion era. We aimed to identify the risk factors of a major adverse cardiac event (MACE) and the long-term effect of beta-blockers in two large cohorts in Taiwan. Two prospective observational cohorts, including patients with known atherosclerosis cardiovascular disease (T-SPARCLE) and patients with at least one risk factor of ASCVD but without clinically evident ASCVD (T-PPARCLE), were conducted in Taiwan. The primary endpoint is the time of first occurrence of a MACE (cardiovascular death, nonfatal stroke, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and cardiac arrest with resuscitation). Between December 2009 and November 2014, with a median 2.4 years follow-up, 11,747 eligible patients (6921 and 4826 in T-SPARCLE and T-PPARCLE, respectively) were enrolled. Among them, 273 patients (2.3%) met the primary endpoint. With multivariate Cox PH model analysis, usage of beta-blocker was lower in patients with MACE (42.9% vs. 52.4%, p < 0.01). In patients with ASCVD, beta-blocker usage was associated with lower MACEs (hazard ratio 0.72; p < 0.001), but not in patients without ASCVD. The event-free survival of beta-blocker users remained higher during the follow-up period (p < 0.005) of ASCVD patients. In conclusion, in ASCVD patients, reduced MACE was associated with beta-blocker usage, and the effect was maintained during a six-year follow-up. Prescribing beta-blockers as secondary prevention is reasonable in the Taiwanese population.