History and Development of Coronary Flow Reserve and Fractional Flow Reserve for Clinical Applications

Doppler Echocardiography Assessment of Coronary Microvascular Function in Patients With Angina and No Obstructive Coronary Artery Disease

Echocardiographic evaluation is an essential part of the diagnostic work-up in patients with known or suspected cardiovascular disease. Transthoracic Doppler echocardiography (TTDE) enables straightforward and reliable visualization of flow in the left anterior descending artery. In the absence of obstructive coronary artery disease, low TTDE-derived coronary flow velocity reserve (CFVR) is considered a marker of coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMD). TTDE CFVR is free from ionizing radiation and widely available, utilizing high-frequency transducers, pharmacologic vasodilator stress, and pulsed-wave Doppler quantification of diastolic peak flow velocities. European Society of Cardiology guidelines recommend TTDE CFVR evaluation only following preceding anatomic invasive or non-invasive coronary imaging excluding obstructive CAD. Accordingly, clinical use of TTDE CFVR is limited and CMD frequently goes undiagnosed. An evolving body of evidence underlines that low CFVR is an important and robust predictor of adverse prognosis and continuing symptoms in angina patients both with and without obstructive CAD. The majority of angina patients have no obstructive CAD, particularly among women. This has led to the suggestion that there may be a gender-specific female atherosclerotic phenotype with less epicardial obstruction, and a low CFVR signifying CMD instead. Nevertheless, available evidence indicates low CFVR is an equally important prognostic marker in both men and women. In this review, TTDE CFVR was evaluated regarding indication, practical and technical aspects, and interpretation of results. Association with symptoms and prognosis, comparison with alternative invasive and non-invasive imaging modalities, and possible interventions in angina patients with low CFVR were discussed, and key research questions were proposed.

Comparison Between 5- and 1-Year Outcomes Using Cutoff Values of Pressure Drop Coefficient and Fractional Flow Reserve for Diagnosing Coronary Artery Diseases

Background

The current pressure-based coronary diagnostic index, fractional flow reserve (FFR), has a limited efficacy in the presence of microvascular disease (MVD). To overcome the limitations of FFR, the objective is to assess the recently introduced pressure drop coefficient (CDP), a fundamental fluid dynamics-based combined pressure–flow index.

Methods

We hypothesize that CDP will result in improved clinical outcomes in comparison to FFR. To test the hypothesis, chi-square test was performed to compare the percent major adverse cardiac events (%MACE) at 5 years between (a) FFR < 0.75 and CDP > 27.9 and (b) FFR < 0.80 and CDP > 25.4 groups using a prospective cohort study. Furthermore, Kaplan–Meier survival curves were compared between the FFR and CDP groups. The results were considered statistically significant for p < 0.05. The outcomes of the CDP arm were presumptive as clinical decision was solely based on the FFR.

Results

For the complete patient group, the %MACE in the CDP > 27.9 group (10 out of 35, 29%) was lower in comparison to the FFR < 0.75 group (11 out of 20, 55%), and the difference was near significant (p = 0.05). The survival analysis showed a significantly higher survival rate (p = 0.01) in the CDP > 27.9 group (n = 35) when compared to the FFR < 0.75 group (n = 20). The results remained similar for the FFR = 0.80 cutoff. The comparison of the 5-year MACE outcomes with the 1-year outcomes for the complete patient group showed similar trends, with a higher statistical significance for a longer follow-up period of 5 years.

Conclusion

Based on the MACE and survival analysis outcomes, CDP could possibly be an alternate diagnostic index for decision-making in the cardiac catheterization laboratory.

Clinical Trial Registration

www.ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT01719016.

Computed Tomography Fractional Flow Reserve to Guide Coronary Angiography and Intervention

Computed tomography angiography (CTA) has played a significant role in evaluation of coronary artery disease in the last decade and has demonstrated high sensitivity and negative predictive values. However, the positive predictive value as compared with invasive fractional flow reserve (FFR) is limited. CT-FFR has emerged as a disruptive noninvasive technology with higher specificity and diagnostic accuracy for detection of hemodynamically significant coronary lesions as compared with invasive FFR than conventional coronary CTA. CT-FFR has been shown to be cost-effective as a gate-keeper to invasive coronary angiography and has the potential to limit unnecessary invasive angiography studies.

Invasive FFR and Noninvasive CFR in the Evaluation of Ischemia: What Is the Future?

This review provides an integrative and forward-looking perspective on the gamut of coronary physiology for the diagnosis and management of atherosclerosis. Because clinical events serve as the ultimate gold standard, the future of all diagnostic tests, including invasive fractional flow reserve and noninvasive coronary flow reserve, depends on their ability to improve patient outcomes. Given the prominent role of acute coronary syndromes and invasive procedures in cardiology, we practically consider 2 broad categories of patients with coronary disease: acute and stable. For patients with acute coronary disease, coronary physiology may potentially refine treatment of the culprit lesion. For both patients with stable and acute nonculprit disease, reducing hard endpoints with revascularization potentially occurs at the severe end of the focal physiological spectrum, an area under-represented in existing trials. Nonepicardial disease and diffuse atherosclerosis remain underexplored aspects of coronary physiology for testing of novel treatments.