Background: The filter-based FilterWire EX(Boston Scientific, Natick, MA) embolic protection system and the GuardWire(Medtronic, Santa Rosa, CA) balloon occlusion and aspiration device have been previously shown to reduce periprocedural complication rates of percutaneous coronary intervention for saphenous vein graft(SVG) disease and are considered the standard of care in this setting. The lateclinical course after treatment with these devices has not been reported. Methods: In the FIRE trial, 651 patients undergoing SVG intervention were randomized to either the FilterWire EX or GuardWire. Six-month rates of the primary end point(composite major adverse cardiac events[MACE]) and its components(death, myocardial infarction[MI], or target vessel revascularization)were studied. Results: MACE at 30 days occurred in 9.9%of patients randomized to the FilterWire EX compared with 11.6%with the GuardWire, P=.53. By 6 months, MACE had increased to 19.3%and 21.9%in FilterWire EX and GuardWire groups, respectively,(relative risk 0.88, 95%CI 0.65-1.19; P=.44). All-cause 6-month mortality in the entire population was 3.5%(3.0%with FilterWire EX vs 4.1%with GuardWire, P=.53, with all deaths occurring after hospital discharge). MI occurred in 12.0%of patients at 6 months(12.1%vs 11.9%with the FilterWire EX and GuardWire, respectively, P=.99), and target vessel revascularization was required in 9.1%(8.2%vs 10.0%, respectively, P=.42). Conclusions: SVG intervention with the FilterWire EX and GuardWire distal protection devices resulted in similar outcomes at 6 months, although the clinical course after hospital discharge was not benign, with significant rates of death, MI, and repeat intervention. Background: The filter-based Filter Wire EX (Boston Scientific, Natick, MA) embolic protection system and the GuardWire (Medtronic, Santa Rosa, CA) balloon occlusion and aspiration device have been previously shown to reduce periprocedural complication rates of percutaneous coronary intervention for saphenous vein graft (SVG) disease and are considered the standard of care in this setting. The lateclinical course after treatment with these devices has not been reported. Methods: In the FIRE trial, 651 patients undergoing SVG intervention were randomized to either the FilterWire EX or Six-month rates of the primary end point (composite major adverse cardiac events [MACE]) and its components (death, myocardial infarction [MI], or target vessel revascularization) were studied. Results: MACE at 30 days occurred in 9.9 % of patients randomized to the FilterWire EX compared with 11.6% with the GuardWire, P = .53. By 6 months, MACE had increased to 19.3% and 21.9% in FilterWire EX and GuardWire gr All-cause 6-month mortality in the entire population was 3.5% (3.0% with Filter Wire EX vs 4.1% with GuardWire, P = .44) .53, with all deaths occurring after hospital discharge). MI occurred in 12.0% of patients at 6 months (12.1% vs 11.9% with the FilterWire EX and GuardWire, respectively, P = .99), and target vessel revascularization was required in Conclusions: SVG intervention with the FilterWire EX and GuardWire distal protection devices result like in 6 months, although the clinical course after hospital discharge was not benign, with significant rates of death, MI, and repeat intervention.