The Crux of Maximum Hyperemia

Intravascular Imaging-Derived Physiology-Basic Principles and Clinical Application

Intravascular imaging-derived physiology is emerging as a promising tool allowing simultaneous anatomic and functional lesion assessment. Recently, several optical coherence tomography-based and intravascular ultrasound-based fractional flow reserve (FFR) indices have been developed that compute FFR through computational fluid dynamics, fluid dynamics equations, or machine-learning methods. This review aims to provide an overview of the currently available intravascular imaging-based physiologic indices, their diagnostic performance, and clinical application.

Quantitative Flow Ratio to Predict Non-Target-Vessel Events Before Planned Staged Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome

BACKGROUND

The optimal time point of staged percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) among patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) remains a matter of debate. Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) is a novel noninvasive method to assess the hemodynamic significance of coronary stenoses. We aimed to investigate whether QFR could refine the timing of staged PCI of non-target vessels (non-TVs) on top of clinical judgment for patients with ACS.

METHODS AND RESULTS

For this cohort study, patients with ACS from Bern University Hospital, Switzerland, scheduled to undergo out-of-hospital non-TV staged PCI were eligible. The primary end point was the composite of non-TV myocardial infarction and urgent unplanned non-TV PCI before planned staged PCI. The association between lowest QFR per patient measured in the non-TV (from index angiogram) and the primary end point was assessed using multivariable adjusted Cox proportional hazards regressions with QFR included as linear or penalized spline (nonlinear) term. QFR was measured in 1093 of 1432 patients with ACS scheduled to undergo non-TV staged PCI. Median time to staged PCI was 28 days. The primary end point occurred in 5% of the patients. In multivariable analysis (1018 patients), there was no independent association between non-TV QFR and the primary end point (hazard ratio, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.69-1.05] per 0.1 increase; P=0.125; nonlinear P=0.648).

CONCLUSIONS

In selected patients with ACS scheduled to undergo staged PCI at a median of 4 weeks after index PCI, QFR did not emerge as an independent predictor of non-TV events before planned staged PCI. Thus, this study does not provide conceptual evidence that QFR is helpful to refine the timing of staged PCI on top of clinical judgment.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02241291.

Tolerability and efficacy of a reduced dose adenosine stress cardiac magnetic resonance protocol under general anesthesia in infants and children

BACKGROUND

Intravenous adenosine induces pharmacological stress by causing vasodilatation and thus carries the risk of severe hypotension when combined with vasodilatory effects of anesthetic agents.

OBJECTIVE

This study describes our experience with a reduced dose adenosine cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) protocol in young children under general anesthesia (GA).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a retrospective report of all patients from birth to 18 years who underwent adenosine stress cardiac MRI under GA between August 2018 and November 2022. Based on our anecdotal experience of severe adverse effects in patients receiving adenosine infusion under GA and in discussion with the pediatric anesthesia team, we developed a modified protocol starting at a dose of 110 mcg/kg/min with incremental escalation to a full dose of 140 mcg/kg/min to achieve desired hemodynamic effect.

RESULTS

Twenty-two children (mean age 6.5 years, mean weight 28 kg) satisfied the inclusion criteria. The diagnoses included Kawasaki disease (7), anomalous aortic origin of left coronary artery (3), anomalous aortic origin of right coronary artery (2), coronary fistula (3), repaired d-transposition of great arteries (2), repaired anomalous left coronary artery from pulmonary artery (2), repaired truncus arteriosus with left coronary artery occlusion (1), extracardiac-Fontan with left coronary artery myocardial bridge (1), and post heart transplantation (1). Nine patients needed dose escalation beyond 110 mcg/kg/min. Two patients had transient hypotension during testing (systemic blood pressure drop > 25 mmHg). No patient developed significant heart block or bronchospasm. Six patients (repeat study in one) demonstrated inducible perfusion defects (27%) on stress perfusion sequences-5 of whom had confirmed significant coronary abnormalities on angiography or direct surgical inspection.

CONCLUSION

A reduced/incremental dose adenosine stress cardiac MRI protocol under GA in children is safe and feasible. This avoids severe hypotension which is both unsafe and may result in inaccurate data.

Assessment of extracranial carotid artery disease using digital twins - A pilot study

To improve risk stratification in extracranial internal carotid artery disease (CAD), patients who would benefit maximally from revascularization must be identified. In cardiology, the fractional flow reserve (FFR) has become a reference standard for evaluating the functional severity of coronary artery stenosis, and noninvasive surrogates thereof relying on computational fluid dynamics (CFD) have been developed. Here, we present a CFD-based workflow using digital twins of patients' carotid bifurcations derived from computed tomography angiography for the noninvasive functional assessment of CAD. We reconstructed patient-specific digital twins of 37 carotid bifurcations. We implemented a CFD model using common carotid artery peak systolic velocity (PSV) acquired with Doppler ultrasound (DUS) as inlet boundary condition and a two-element Windkessel model as oulet boundary condition. The agreement between CFD and DUS on the PSV in the internal carotid artery (ICA) was then compared. The relative error for the agreement between DUS and CFD was 9% ± 20% and the intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.88. Furthermore, hyperemic simulations in a physiological range were feasible and unmasked markedly different pressure drops along two ICA stenoses with similar degree of narrowing under comparable ICA blood flow. Hereby, we lay the foundation for prospective studies on noninvasive CFD-based derivation of metrics similar to the FFR for the assessment of CAD.

Intravascular Imaging-Derived Physiology-Basic Principles and Clinical Application

Intravascular imaging-derived physiology is emerging as a promising tool allowing simultaneous anatomic and functional lesion assessment. Recently, several optical coherence tomography-based and intravascular ultrasound-based fractional flow reserve (FFR) indices have been developed that compute FFR through computational fluid dynamics, fluid dynamics equations, or machine-learning methods. This review aims to provide an overview of the currently available intravascular imaging-based physiologic indices, their diagnostic performance, and clinical application.

Comparison between the diagnostic performance of vessel fractional flow reserve and nonhyperemic pressure ratio for functionally significant coronary stenosis severity as assessed by fractional flow reserve

BACKGROUND

Fractional flow reserve (FFR) and nonhyperemic pressure ratios (NHPRs) have been widely used to assess the functional severity of coronary stenosis. However, their measurement requires using a pressure wire, making their use in all patients difficult. The recently developed vessel fractional flow reserve (vFFR), derived from three-dimensional quantitative coronary angiography, is expected to serve as a surrogate for pressure wire assessment.

METHODS

This retrospective study was conducted on patients with intermediate coronary stenosis who underwent FFR and NHPR measurements. The vFFR and NHPR values were compared for diagnosing coronary stenosis as defined by an FFR of ≤0.80, and the number of patients not requiring wire-based assessment was estimated.

RESULTS

In a total of 90 lesions from 74 patients (median [SD] age 75 [12] years; men 80%), the median FFR was 0.78 (0.72-0.84), and 57% of these lesions (N = 51) exhibited an FFR of ≤0.80. vFFR provided high discrimination for coronary stenosis (area under the curve 0.80, 95% confidence interval 0.70-0.90), which was comparable to that of NHPRs (p = 0.42). High diagnostic accuracy was consistently observed across a variety of clinical presentations (i.e., old age, diabetes, target coronary artery, and left ventricular hypertrophy) (p_interaction  > 0.05). In total, 55 lesions (61%) demonstrated positive or negative likelihood of coronary stenosis when vFFR was <0.73 (specificity 90%) or >0.87 (sensitivity 88%), respectively.

CONCLUSION

vFFR demonstrated excellent diagnostic performance for detecting functionally significant coronary stenosis as evaluated by FFR. vFFR may be used as a surrogate for pressure wire assessment.

Intracoronary nicorandil induced hyperemia for physiological assessments in the coronary artery lesions

OBJECTIVE

Maximal hyperemia is a key element of invasive physiological examination. The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of intracoronary (IC) nicorandil in comparison with adenosine 5'-triphosphate (ATP) intravenous (i.v.) injection for fractional flow reserve (FFR) measurement in coronary artery lesions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this study, 46 patients who had their FFR measured were enrolled, including 51 lesions. Hyperemia was induced by bolus 2 mg nicorandil and ATP (40 mg ATP + 36 ml saline, weight × 10 ml/h) for FFR measurement. The safety and efficacy of IC nicorandil were evaluated.

RESULTS

The mean FFR values measured by nicorandil and ATP were 0.810 ± 0.013 and 0.799 ± 0.099, p < 0.001, respectively. There was a strong correlation between FFR measured by nicorandil and ATP (r = 0.983, R 2 = 0.966, FFRnicorandil = 0.937 × FFRATP + 0.061). The rate of FFR ≤ 0.75 in the nicorandil and ATP groups was 31.37 vs. 35.29%, respectively (p = 0.841), the consistency rate was 96.08%; the FFR ≤ 0.8 rate was 41.18 and 43.14%, respectively (p = 0.674), and the consistency rate was 90.20%. In five lesions, the FFR value measured by nicorandil ranged between 0.79 and 0.82, indicating inconsistency according to FFR ≤ 0.8. The blood pressure changes caused by nicorandil and ATP were 12.96 ± 6.83 and 22.22 ± 11.44 mmHg (p < 0.001); the heart rate changes were 2.43 ± 1.31 and 6.52 ± 2.87 beats/min, respectively (p < 0.001); and the PR interval changes were 6.0 (1.0-11.0) and 9.0 (2.0-19.0) ms, respectively (p < 0.001). Visual analog scale (VAS) scores in the nicorandil group were all in the range 0-2, while in the ATP group were mostly in the range of 3-5.

CONCLUSION

Intracoronary bolus of nicorandil (2 mg) infusion induces stable hyperemia, and it could be considered as an alternative drug to ATP for FFR measurement with a lower side effect profile in most patients.

Angiography-Based Fractional Flow Reserve: State of the Art

Purpose of Review

Three-dimensional quantitative coronary angiography-based methods of fractional flow reserve (FFR) derivation have emerged as an appealing alternative to conventional pressure-wire-based physiological lesion assessment and have the potential to further extend the use of physiology in general. Here, we summarize the current evidence related to angiography-based FFR and perspectives on future developments.

Recent Findings

Growing evidence suggests good diagnostic performance of angiography-based FFR measurements, both in chronic and acute coronary syndromes, as well as in specific lesion subsets, such as long and calcified lesions, left main coronary stenosis, and bifurcations. More recently, promising results on the superiority of angiography-based FFR as compared to angiography-guided PCI have been published.

Summary

Currently available angiography -FFR indices proved to be an excellent alternative to invasive pressure wire-based FFR. Dedicated prospective outcome data comparing these indices to routine guideline recommended PCI including the use of FFR are eagerly awaited.

Instantaneous wave-free ratio compared with fractional flow reserve in PCI: A cost-minimization analysis

BACKGROUND

Coronary physiology is a routine diagnostic tool when assessing whether coronary revascularization is indicated. The iFR-SWEDEHEART trial demonstrated similar clinical outcomes when using instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) or fractional flow reserve (FFR) to guide revascularization. The objective of this analysis was to assess a cost-minimization analysis of iFR-guided compared with FFR-guided revascularization.

METHODS

In this cost-minimization analysis we used a decision-tree model from a healthcare perspective with a time-horizon of one year to estimate the cost difference between iFR and FFR in a Nordic setting and a United States (US) setting. Treatment pathways and health care utilizations were constructed from the iFR-SWEDEHEART trial. Unit cost for revascularization and myocardial infarction in the Nordic setting and US setting were derived from the Nordic diagnosis-related group versus Medicare cost data. Unit cost of intravenous adenosine administration and cost per stent placed were based on the average costs from the enrolled centers in the iFR-SWEDEHEART trial. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were carried out to test the robustness of the result.

RESULTS

The cost-minimization analysis demonstrated a cost saving per patient of $681 (95% CI: $641 - $723) in the Nordic setting and $1024 (95% CI: $934 - $1114) in the US setting, when using iFR-guided compared with FFR-guided revascularization. The results were not sensitive to changes in uncertain parameters or assumptions.

CONCLUSIONS

IFR-guided revascularization is associated with significant savings in cost compared with FFR-guided revascularization.

Physiological assessment after percutaneous coronary intervention: the hard truth

Physiologically guided revascularization, using Fractional Flow Reserve (FFR) or instantaneous wave free ratio (iFR) has been demonstrated to be associated with better long-term outcomes compared to an angiographically-guided strategy, mainly avoiding inappropriate coronary stenting and its associated adverse events. On the contrary, the role of invasive physiological assessment after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is much less well established. However, a large body of evidence suggests that a relevant proportion of patients undergoing PCI with a satisfying angiographic result show instead a suboptimal functional product with a potentially negative prognostic impact. For this reason, many efforts have been focused to identify interventional strategies to physiologically optimize PCI. Measuring the functional result after as PCI, especially when performed after a physiological assessment, implies that the operator is ready to accept the hard truth of an unsatisfactory physiological result despite angiographically optimal and, consequently, to optimize the product with some additional effort. The aim of this review is to bridge this gap in knowledge by better defining the paradigm shift of invasive physiological assessment from a simple tool for deciding whether an epicardial stenosis has to be treated to a thoroughly physiological approach to PCI with the suggestion of a practical flow chart.

Quantitative Flow Ratio to Predict Nontarget Vessel-Related Events at 5 Years in Patients With ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Undergoing Angiography-Guided Revascularization

Background In ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, angiography-based complete revascularization is superior to culprit-lesion-only percutaneous coronary intervention. Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) is a novel, noninvasive, vasodilator-free method used to assess the hemodynamic significance of coronary stenoses. We aimed to investigate the incremental value of QFR over angiography in nonculprit lesions in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing angiography-guided complete revascularization. Methods and Results This was a retrospective post hoc QFR analysis of untreated nontarget vessels (any degree of diameter stenosis [DS]) from the randomized multicenter COMFORTABLE AMI (Comparison of Biolimus Eluted From an Erodible Stent Coating With Bare Metal Stents in Acute ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction) trial by assessors blinded for clinical outcomes. The primary end point was cardiac death, spontaneous nontarget vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically indicated nontarget vessel revascularization (ie, ≥70% DS by 2-dimensional quantitative coronary angiography or ≥50% DS and ischemia) at 5 years. Of 1161 patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, 946 vessels in 617 patients were analyzable by QFR. At 5 years, the rate of the primary end point was significantly higher in patients with QFR ≤0.80 (n=35 patients, n=36 vessels) versus QFR >0.80 (n=582 patients, n=910 vessels) (62.9% versus 12.5%, respectively; hazard ratio [HR], 7.33 [95% CI, 4.54-11.83], P<0.001), driven by higher rates of nontarget vessel myocardial infarction (12.8% versus 3.1%, respectively; HR, 4.38 [95% CI, 1.47-13.02], P=0.008) and nontarget vessel revascularization (58.6% versus 7.7%, respectively; HR, 10.99 [95% CI, 6.39-18.91], P<0.001) with no significant differences for cardiac death. Multivariable analysis identified QFR ≤0.80 but not ≥50% DS by 3-dimensional quantitative coronary angiography as an independent predictor of the primary end point. Results were consistent, including only >30% DS by 3-dimensional quantitative coronary angiography. Conclusions Our study suggests incremental value of QFR over angiography-guided percutaneous coronary intervention for nonculprit lesions among patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention.

Diagnostic utility and safety of intracoronary nicorandil as a hyperemic agent for the measurement of fractional flow reserve

We investigated the diagnostic utility and safety of intracoronary bolus administration of nicorandil compared with intravenous administration of adenosine for evaluating FFR in patients with intermediate (40-70%) coronary stenosis. The FFR values obtained with nicorandil and adenosine showed linear relationship. This correlation is statistically significant with regression coefficient of 0.932 (R2 = 0.834, p < 0.001). The side effects such as bronchospasm, hypotension, and bradycardia were significantly higher after administration of adenosine compared to nicorandil (20% vs. 1.66%, p = 0.001). Intracoronary use of nicorandil seems to be promising in offering the advantages of lesser side effects, similar efficacy, and lesser cost as compared to adenosine.

Cardiac CT perfusion and FFRCTA: pathophysiological features in ischemic heart disease

Cardiac computed tomography (CCT) has rapidly evolved, becoming a powerful integrated tool for the evaluation of coronary artery disease (CAD), and being superior to other noninvasive methods due to its high accuracy and ability to simultaneously assess both lumen stenosis and atherosclerotic plaque burden. Furthermore, CCT is regarded as an effective gatekeeper for coronary angiography, and carries independent important prognostic information. In the last decade, the introduction of new functional CCT applications, namely CCT perfusion (CCTP) imaging and CT-derived fractional flow reserve (FFRCTA), has opened the door for accurate assessment of the haemodynamic significance of stenoses. These new CCT technologies, thus, share the unique advantage of assessing both myocardial ischemia and patient-specific coronary artery anatomy, providing an integrated anatomical/functional analysis. In the present review, starting from the pathophysiology of myocardial ischemia, we evaluate the existing evidence for functional CCT imaging and its value in relation to alternative, well-established, non-invasive imaging modalities and invasive indices of ischemia (currently the gold-standard). The knowledge of clinical applications, benefits, and limitations of these new CCT technologies will allow efficient and optimal use in clinical practice in the near future.

Decreased resting coronary flow and impaired endothelial function in patients with vasospastic angina

OBJECTIVES

Coronary endothelial and circulatory dysfunction plays important roles in the pathogenesis of vasospastic angina (VSA). However, a complete understanding of the entire coronary circulation including microvasculature in patients with VSA is lacking.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 32 patients without obstructive coronary artery disease in the left descending coronary artery, who underwent an intracoronary acetylcholine (ACh) provocation test for diagnosis of VSA, were enrolled prospectively. A positive diagnosis of the ACh test was defined as total/subtotal coronary artery narrowing accompanied by chest pain and/or ischemic ECG changes. Angina frequency and severity at baseline, and 1 and 3 months were recorded. Coronary circulation was evaluated invasively using a thermodilution method by obtaining the mean transit time (Tmn) at rest and hyperemia, coronary flow reserve, and index of microcirculatory resistance. Systemic endothelial function was assessed by the reactive hyperemia index.

RESULTS

There were 14 (44%) and 18 (56%) patients with and without a positive ACh provocation test. The baseline characteristics did not differ significantly between the two groups. Patients with VSA had a significantly lower reactive hyperemia index compared with those without VSA (1.70±0.33 vs. 2.12±0.53, P=0.02). Coronary flow reserve, index of microcirculatory resistance, and hyperemic Tmn were not different between the two groups, whereas resting Tmn was significantly longer in patients with VSA (1.20±0.44 vs. 0.71±0.37, P=0.002). Although the frequency and severity of angina improved from baseline to 1 and 3 months in patients with both positive and negative ACh tests, there was no difference between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Patients with VSA had decreased resting coronary flow and impaired endothelial function.

Instantaneous wave-free ratio-guided paclitaxel-coated balloon treatment for de novo coronary lesions

Paclitaxel-coated balloon (PCB) treatment guided by fractional flow reserve (FFR) is safe and effective for de novo coronary lesions. It is unknown whether the instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR), an alternative measure that does not require the administration of adenosine, will offer benefits similar to those of FFR in de novo lesion treatment with PCB. Baseline, post-balloon and 9-month angiographical parameters were obtained from 116 lesions of 104 patients. The cutoff value of iFR after balloon angioplasty used to define functionally nonsignificant residual stenotic lesions was 0.86 and they were subdivided into PCB or Stent group according to the treated device. The primary endpoint was late lumen loss at 9 months and the secondary endpoint was target vessel failure (TVF) at 3 years. Fifty-eight lesions were treated with PCB only and 58 lesions were treated with metal stent implantation. There were no differences in iFR between PCB and Stent groups at baseline (0.76 ± 0.19 vs. 0.73 ± 0.23, p = 0.630) and after procedure (0.93 ± 0.04 vs. 0.94 ± 0.05, p = 0.574). At 9 months, late lumen loss was significantly lower in PCB group compared with Stent group (0.04 ± 0.32 mm vs. 0.59 ± 0.77 mm, p = 0.001). At 3-year follow-up, TVF were not different between the treatment groups (5.2% vs. 8.6%, p = 0.453). PCB treatment guided by iFR measured right after balloon angioplasty is safe and effective for de novo coronary lesions with good angiographic results at 9 months and similar clinical outcomes at 3 years compared to stent group.

Saline-induced Pd/Pa ratio predicts functional significance of coronary stenosis assessed using fractional flow reserve

AIMS

Fractional flow reserve (FFR), assessed using distal coronary pressure/aortic pressure (Pd)/(Pa) ratio, functionally evaluates coronary stenosis. An assessment method without vasodilators would be helpful. A single intracoronary bolus of saline decreases Pd because of the speculated low-viscosity effect. We hypothesised that saline-induced Pd/Pa ratio (SPR) could functionally evaluate coronary stenosis. This study aimed to test the accuracy and utility of SPR for predicting FFR ≤0.80.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In 137 coronary lesions with over 50% angiographic diameter stenosis, SPR was assessed using an intracoronary bolus of saline (2 mL/s) for five heartbeats (SPR-5) and three heartbeats (SPR-3). FFR was obtained after intravenous adenosine infusion (140 µg/kg/min). There was a strong correlation between FFR and SPR-5 or SPR-3 (R=0.941 and R=0.933, respectively). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis demonstrated good accuracy (86.3%) for SPR-5, with a cut-off of ≤0.84 for predicting FFR ≤0.80 (area under ROC curve 0.96, specificity 94.3, sensitivity 79.9). Thirty-three lesions (24%) were located in the "grey zone" (SPR 0.83-0.88). No complications were observed in 673 SPR measurements.

CONCLUSIONS

SPR may accurately predict FFR and can limit adenosine use to one in four lesions. Further studies are needed to confirm the validity of SPR.

Use of the Instantaneous Wave-free Ratio or Fractional Flow Reserve in PCI

BACKGROUND

Coronary revascularization guided by fractional flow reserve (FFR) is associated with better patient outcomes after the procedure than revascularization guided by angiography alone. It is unknown whether the instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR), an alternative measure that does not require the administration of adenosine, will offer benefits similar to those of FFR.

METHODS

We randomly assigned 2492 patients with coronary artery disease, in a 1:1 ratio, to undergo either iFR-guided or FFR-guided coronary revascularization. The primary end point was the 1-year risk of major adverse cardiac events, which were a composite of death from any cause, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or unplanned revascularization. The trial was designed to show the noninferiority of iFR to FFR, with a margin of 3.4 percentage points for the difference in risk.

RESULTS

At 1 year, the primary end point had occurred in 78 of 1148 patients (6.8%) in the iFR group and in 83 of 1182 patients (7.0%) in the FFR group (difference in risk, -0.2 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -2.3 to 1.8; P<0.001 for noninferiority; hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.68 to 1.33; P=0.78). The risk of each component of the primary end point and of death from cardiovascular or noncardiovascular causes did not differ significantly between the groups. The number of patients who had adverse procedural symptoms and clinical signs was significantly lower in the iFR group than in the FFR group (39 patients [3.1%] vs. 385 patients [30.8%], P<0.001), and the median procedural time was significantly shorter (40.5 minutes vs. 45.0 minutes, P=0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Coronary revascularization guided by iFR was noninferior to revascularization guided by FFR with respect to the risk of major adverse cardiac events at 1 year. The rate of adverse procedural signs and symptoms was lower and the procedural time was shorter with iFR than with FFR. (Funded by Philips Volcano; DEFINE-FLAIR ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02053038 .).

Assessment of increasing intravenous adenosine dose in fractional flow reserve

Background

Effects of increased adenosine dose in the assessment of fractional flow reserve (FFR) were studied in relation to FFR results, hemodynamic effects and patient discomfort. FFR require maximal hyperemia mediated by adenosine. Standard dose is 140 μg/kg/min administrated intravenously. Higher doses are commonly used in clinical practice, but an extensive comparison between standard intravenous dose and a high dose (220 μg/kg/min) has previously not been performed.

Methods

Seventy-five patients undergoing FFR received standard dose adenosine, followed by high dose adenosine. FFR, mean arterial pressure (MAP) and heart rate (HR) were analyzed. Patient discomfort measured by Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) was assessed.

Results

No significant difference was found between the doses in FFR value (0.85 [0.79–0.90] vs 0.85 [0.79–0.89], p = 0.24). The two doses correlated well irrespective of lesion severity (r = 0.86, slope = 0.89, p = <0.001). There were no differences in MAP or HR. Patient discomfort was more pronounced using high dose adenosine (8.0 [5.0–9.0]) versus standard dose (5.0 [2.0–7.0]), p = <0.001.

Conclusions

Increased dose adenosine does not improve hyperemia and is associated with increased patient discomfort. Our findings do not support the use of high dose adenosine.

Trial registration

Retrospective Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN14618196. Registered 15 December 2016.

Effect of High (200 μg/kg per Minute) Adenosine Dose Infusion on Fractional Flow Reserve Variability

BACKGROUND

Variations in distal coronary pressure (Pd)/aortic pressure (Pa) ratio during steady-state hyperemia with standard (140 μg/kg per minute) adenosine dose may hamper accurate fractional flow reserve assessment. This study investigated to what extent an increased adenosine dose can overcome Pd/Pa variation.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In a prospective, single-arm study, out of 95 prospectively screened patients, 38 (40.0%) exhibited significant (≥0.05 difference of max Pd/Pa minus min Pd/Pa) variations in Pd/Pa from 15 s post Pd/Pa dip and until the end of a 3-minute adenosine (140 μg/kg per minute) infusion. Thirty patients agreed to participate in a post 5-minute repeat fractional flow reserve assessment using 200 μg/kg per minute 3-minute adenosine infusion. The study's co-primary end point of Pd/Pa coefficient of dispersion was lower for the high versus standard adenosine dose: 1.31 (1.13-2.72) versus 2.76 (2.38-5.60), P=0.002. The study's co-primary end point of ΔPd/Pa was also lower for the high versus standard adenosine dose: 0.065 (0.038-0.10) versus 0.08 (0.06-0.11), P=0.002. This difference was mainly driven by the lowering effect of the high adenosine dose on the maximum Pd/Pa compared to the standard dose: 0.84 (0.81-0.93) versus 0.90 (0.83-0.95), P=0.007, while minimum Pd/Pa remained unaffected. High adenosine dose was adequately tolerated by all patients, without requiring infusion discontinuation in any case.

CONCLUSIONS

Pd/Pa variability is frequently observed during standard adenosine infusion and is significantly decreased following a high (200 μg/kg per minute) adenosine dose. This is achieved without a significant difference in the minimum Pd/Pa.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT02350439.

The FAME Trials: Impact on Clinical Decision Making

Careful and stepwise evaluation of the fractional flow reserve (FFR) index has been performed over the years, culminating in the landmark Fractional Flow Reserve Versus Angiography for Multivessel Evaluation (FAME) and Fractional Flow Reserve-Guided Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Plus Optimal Medical Treatment Versus Optimal Medical Treatment Alone in Patients with Stable Coronary Artery Disease (FAME II) trials. Findings from these studies demonstrated unequivocally the overall inadequacy of angiography versus FFR to correctly assess stenosis severity. Thus, proof of concept and clinical applicability was established beyond debate and will be discussed here.

Prospective Assessment of the Diagnostic Accuracy of Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio to Assess Coronary Stenosis Relevance: Results of ADVISE II International, Multicenter Study (ADenosine Vasodilator Independent Stenosis Evaluation II)

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to assess the diagnostic accuracy of the instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) to characterize, outside of a pre-specified range of values, stenosis severity, as defined by fractional flow reserve (FFR) ≤0.80, in a prospective, independent, controlled, core laboratory-based environment.

BACKGROUND

Studies with methodological heterogeneity have reported some discrepancies in the classification agreement between iFR and FFR. The ADVISE II (ADenosine Vasodilator Independent Stenosis Evaluation II) study was designed to overcome limitations of previous iFR versus FFR comparisons.

METHODS

A total of 919 intermediate coronary stenoses were investigated during baseline and hyperemia. From these, 690 pressure recordings (n = 598 patients) met core laboratory physiology criteria and are included in this report.

RESULTS

The pre-specified iFR cut-off of 0.89 was optimal for the study and correctly classified 82.5% of the stenoses, with a sensitivity of 73.0% and specificity of 87.8% (C statistic: 0.90 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.88 to 0.92, p < 0.001]). The proportion of stenoses properly classified by iFR outside of the pre-specified treatment (≤0.85) and deferral (≥0.94) values was 91.6% (95% CI: 88.8% to 93.9%). When combined with FFR use within these cut-offs, the percent of stenoses properly classified by such a pre-specified hybrid iFR-FFR approach was 94.2% (95% CI: 92.2% to 95.8%). The hybrid iFR-FFR approach obviated vasodilators from 65.1% (95% CI: 61.1% to 68.9%) of patients and 69.1% (95% CI: 65.5% to 72.6%) of stenoses.

CONCLUSIONS

The ADVISE II study supports, on the basis rigorous methodology, the diagnostic value of iFR in establishing the functional significance of coronary stenoses, and highlights its complementariness with FFR when used in a hybrid iFR-FFR approach. (ADenosine Vasodilator Independent Stenosis Evaluation II-ADVISE II; NCT01740895).

Can Resting Indices Obviate the Need for Hyperemia and Promote the Routine Use of Physiologically Guided Revascularization?

This article assesses the data from contemporary human studies to address some of the common assumptions regarding hyperemic and baseline physiology in the context of the baseline pressure-derived index of instant wave-free ratio and the hyperemic index of fractional flow reserve. The article aims to determine if the available evidence supports the continued investigation, development, and use of baseline indices.

Pooled comparison of regadenoson versus adenosine for measuring fractional flow reserve and coronary flow in the catheterization laboratory

BACKGROUND

Adenosine is the gold standard for augmenting coronary flow during fractional flow reserve (FFR) testing of intermediate coronary stenoses. However, intravenous infusion is time-consuming and intracoronary injection is subject to variability. Regadenoson is a newer adenosine alternative administered as a single intravenous bolus during nuclear stress testing, but its efficacy and safety during FFR testing have been evaluated only in small, single-center studies.

METHODS

We pooled data from 5 academic hospitals, in which patients undergoing clinically-indicated FFR prospectively underwent comparison of intravenous adenosine infusion (140-175mcg/kg/min) versus regadenoson bolus (400mcg). Hemodynamics and symptoms with adenosine were recorded until maximal hyperemia occurred, and after returning to baseline hemodynamics, regadenoson was administered and monitoring was repeated. In a subset of patients with coronary flow data, average peak velocity (APV) at the distal flow sensor was recorded.

RESULTS

Of 149 patients enrolled, mean age was 59±9years, 76% were male, and 54% underwent testing of the left anterior descending artery. Mean adenosine-FFR and regadenoson-FFR were identical (0.82±0.10) with excellent correlation of individual values (r=0.96, p<0.001) and no difference in patient-reported symptoms. Four patients (2.6%) had discrepancies between the 2 drugs for the clinical decision-making cutoff of FFR≤0.80. Coronary flow responses to adenosine and regadenoson were similar (APV at maximal hyperemia 36cm/s for both, p=0.81).

CONCLUSIONS

Regadenoson single-bolus administration has comparable FFR, symptoms, and coronary flow augmentation when compared with standard intravenous adenosine infusion. With its greater ease of administration, regadenoson may be a more "user-friendly" option for invasive ischemic testing.

Baseline instantaneous wave-free ratio as a pressure-only estimation of underlying coronary flow reserve: results of the JUSTIFY-CFR Study (Joined Coronary Pressure and Flow Analysis to Determine Diagnostic Characteristics of Basal and Hyperemic Indices of Functional Lesion Severity-Coronary Flow Reserve)

BACKGROUND

Coronary flow reserve has extensive validation as a prognostic marker in coronary disease. Although pressure-only fractional flow reserve (FFR) improves outcomes compared with angiography when guiding percutaneous coronary intervention, it disagrees with coronary flow reserve classification 30% of the time. We evaluated whether baseline instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) could provide an improved pressure-only estimation of underlying coronary flow reserve.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Invasive pressure and flow velocity were measured in 216 stenoses from 186 patients with coronary disease. The diagnostic relationship between pressure-only indices (iFR and FFR) and coronary flow velocity reserve (CFVR) was compared using correlation coefficient and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. iFR showed a stronger correlation with underlying CFVR (iFR-CFVR, ρ=0.68 versus FFR-CFVR, ρ=0.50; P<0.001). iFR also agreed more closely with CFVR in stenosis classification (iFR area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.82 versus FFR area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.72; P<0.001, for a CFVR of 2). The closer relationship between iFR and CFVR was found for different CFVR cutoffs and was particularly marked in the 0.6 to 0.9 FFR range. Hyperemic FFR flow was similar to baseline iFR flow in functionally significant lesions (FFR ≤0.75; mean FFR flow, 25.8±13.7 cm/s versus mean iFR flow, 21.5±11.7 cm/s; P=0.13). FFR flow was higher than iFR flow in nonsignificant stenoses (FFR >0.75; mean FFR flow, 42.3±22.8 cm/s versus mean iFR flow, 26.1±15.5 cm/s; P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

When compared with FFR, iFR shows stronger correlation and better agreement with CFVR. These results provide physiological evidence that iFR could potentially be used as a functional index of disease severity, independently from its agreement with FFR.

Hyperemia-free delineation of epicardial and microvascular impairments using a basal index

The assessment of functional coronary lesion severity using intracoronary hemodynamic parameters like the pressure-derived fractional flow reserve and the flow-derived coronary flow reserve are known to rely critically on the establishment of maximal hyperemia. We evaluated a hyperemia-free index, basal pressure drop coefficient (bCDP), that combines pressure and velocity for simultaneous assessment of the status of both epicardial and microvascular circulations. In 23 pigs, simultaneous measurements of distal coronary arterial pressure and flow were performed using a dual-sensor tipped guidewire in the settings of both normal and abnormal microcirculation with the presence of epicardial lesions of area stenosis (AS) < 50% and AS > 50%. The bCDP, a parameter based on fundamental fluid dynamics principles, was calculated as the transtenotic pressure-drop divided by the dynamic pressure in the distal vessel, measured under baseline (without hyperemia) conditions. The group mean values of bCDP for normal (84 ± 18) and abnormal (124.5 ± 15.6) microcirculation were significantly different. Similarly, the mean values of bCDP from AS < 50% (72.5 ± 16.1) and AS > 50% (136 ± 17.2) were also significantly different (p < 0.05). The bCDP could significantly distinguish between lesions of AS < 50% to AS > 50% under normal microcirculation (52.1 vs. 85.8; p < 0.05) and abnormal microcirculation (84.9 vs. 172; p < 0.05). Further, the bCDP correlated linearly and significantly with the hyperemic parameters FFR (r = 0.42, p < 0.05) and CDP (r = 0.50, p < 0.05). The bCDP is a promising clinical diagnostic parameter that can independently assess the severity of epicardial stenosis and microvascular impairment. We believe that it has an immediate appeal for detection of coronary artery disease if validated clinically.

Feasibility and safety of intracoronary nicorandil infusion as a novel hyperemic agent for fractional flow reserve measurements

Fractional flow reserve (FFR) is a useful modality to assess the functional significance of coronary stenoses. Although adenosine triphosphate (ATP) is generally used as the hyperemic stimulus, we sometimes encounter adverse events like hypotension during FFR measurement. Nicorandil, an ATP-sensitive potassium channel opener, recognized as an epicardial and resistance vessel dilator, has not been fully evaluated as a possible alternative hyperemic agent. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and safety of intracoronary nicorandil infusion compared to intravenous ATP for FFR measurement in patients with coronary artery disease. A total of 102 patients with 124 intermediate lesions (diameter stenosis >40 and <70% by visual assessment) were enrolled. All vessels underwent FFR measurements with both ATP (150 μg/kg/min) and nicorandil (2.0 mg) stimulus. FFR, hemodynamic values, and periprocedural adverse events between the two groups were evaluated. A strong correlation was observed between FFR with ATP and FFR with nicorandil (r = 0.954, p < 0.001). The agreement between the two sets of measurements was also high, with a mean difference of 0.01 ± 0.03. The mean aortic pressure drop during pharmacological stimulus was significantly larger with ATP compared to nicorandil (9.6 ± 9.6 vs. 5.5 ± 5.8 mmHg, p < 0.001). During FFR measurement, transient atrioventricular block was frequently observed with ATP compared to nicorandil (4.0 vs. 0%, p = 0.024). This study suggests that intracoronary nicorandil infusion is associated with clinical utility and safety compared to ATP as an alternative hyperemic agent for FFR measurement.

Fractional flow reserve: an updated review

Revascularization of ischemia-producing coronary lesions is widely used in the management of coronary artery disease. However, some coronary lesions appear significant on the conventional angiogram when they are truly non-flow limiting. For this reason, it is becoming increasingly important to determine the coronary physiology. Fractional flow reserve (FFR) has emerged as a useful tool to determine the lesions that require revascularization. Measurement of FFR during invasive coronary angiography now has a class IA indication from the European Society of Cardiology for identifying hemodynamically significant coronary lesions when noninvasive evidence of myocardial ischemia is unavailable. Current data on FFR can be broadly classified into studies that compare the diagnostic accuracy of FFR measurement compared with other noninvasive modalities and studies that test treatment strategies of patients with intermediate coronary stenoses using a threshold value for FFR and that have clinical outcomes as endpoints. In this review, we will discuss the concept of FFR, current evidence supporting its usage, and future perspectives.

Improvement in coronary haemodynamics after percutaneous coronary intervention: assessment using instantaneous wave-free ratio

Objective

To determine whether the instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) can detect improvement in stenosis significance after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and compare this with fractional flow reserve (FFR) and whole cycle Pd/Pa.

Design

A prospective observational study was undertaken in elective patients scheduled for PCI with FFR ≤0.80. Intracoronary pressures were measured at rest and during adenosine-mediated vasodilatation, before and after PCI. iFR, Pd/Pa and FFR values were calculated using the validated fully automated algorithms.

Setting

Coronary catheter laboratories in two UK centres and one in the USA.

Patients

120 coronary stenoses in 112 patients were assessed. The mean age was 63±10 years, while 84% were male; 39% smokers; 33% with diabetes. Mean diameter stenosis was 68±16% by quantitative coronary angiography.

Results

Pre-PCI, mean FFR was 0.66±0.14, mean iFR was 0.75±0.21 and mean Pd/Pa 0.83±0.16. PCI increased all indices significantly (FFR 0.89±0.07, p<0.001; iFR 0.94±0.05, p<0.001; Pd/Pa 0.96±0.04, p<0.001). The change in iFR after intervention (0.20±0.21) was similar to ΔFFR 0.22±0.15 (p=0.25). ΔFFR and ΔiFR were significantly larger than resting ΔPd/Pa (0.13±0.16, both p<0.001). Similar incremental changes occurred in patients with a higher prevalence of risk factors for microcirculatory disease such as diabetes and hypertension.

Conclusions

iFR and FFR detect the changes in coronary haemodynamics elicited by PCI. FFR and iFR have a significantly larger dynamic range than resting Pd/Pa. iFR might be used to objectively document improvement in coronary haemodynamics following PCI in a similar manner to FFR.

Hybrid iFR-FFR decision-making strategy: implications for enhancing universal adoption of physiology-guided coronary revascularisation

AIMS

Adoption of fractional flow reserve (FFR) remains low (6-8%), partly because of the time, cost and potential inconvenience associated with vasodilator administration. The instantaneous wave-Free Ratio (iFR) is a pressure-only index of stenosis severity calculated without vasodilator drugs. Before outcome trials test iFR as a sole guide to revascularisation, we evaluate the merits of a hybrid iFR-FFR decision-making strategy for universal physiological assessment.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Coronary pressure traces from 577 stenoses were analysed. iFR was calculated as the ratio between Pd and Pa in the resting diastolic wave-free window. A hybrid iFR-FFR strategy was evaluated, by allowing iFR to defer some stenoses (where negative predictive value is high) and treat others (where positive predictive value is high), with adenosine being given only to patients with iFR in between those values. For the most recent fixed FFR cut-off (0.8), an iFR of <0.86 could be used to confirm treatment (PPV of 92%), whilst an iFR value of >0.93 could be used to defer revascularisation (NPV of 91%). Limiting vasodilator drugs to cases with iFR values between 0.86 to 0.93 would obviate the need for vasodilator drugs in 57% of patients, whilst maintaining 95% agreement with an FFR-only strategy. If the 0.75-0.8 FFR grey zone is accounted for, vasodilator drug requirement would decrease by 76%.

CONCLUSION

A hybrid iFR-FFR decision-making strategy for revascularisation could increase adoption of physiology-guided PCI, by more than halving the need for vasodilator administration, whilst maintaining high classification agreement with an FFR-only strategy.

Left ventricular end-diastolic pressure affects measurement of fractional flow reserve

BACKGROUND

Fractional flow reserve (FFR), the hyperemic ratio of distal (Pd) to proximal (Pa) coronary pressure, is used to identify the need for coronary revascularization. Changes in left ventricular end-diastolic pressure (LVEDP) might affect measurements of FFR.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

LVEDP was recorded simultaneously with Pd and Pa during conventional FFR measurement as well as during additional infusion of nitroprusside. The relationship between LVEDP, Pa, and FFR was assessed using linear mixed models.

RESULTS

Prospectively collected data for 528 cardiac cycles from 20 coronary arteries in 17 patients were analyzed. Baseline median Pa, Pd, FFR, and LVEDP were 73 mmHg, 49 mmHg, 0.69, and 18 mmHg, respectively. FFR<0.80 was present in 14 arteries (70%). With nitroprusside median Pa, Pd, FFR, and LVEDP were 61 mmHg, 42 mmHg, 0.68, and 12 mmHg, respectively. In a multivariable model for the entire population LVEDP was positively associated with FFR such that FFR increased by 0.008 for every 1-mmHg increase in LVEDP (beta=0.008; P<0.001), an association that was greater in obstructed arteries with FFR<0.80 (beta=0.01; P<0.001). Pa did not directly affect FFR in the multivariable model, but an interaction between LVEDP and Pa determined that LVEDP's effect on FFR is greater at lower Pa.

CONCLUSIONS

LVEDP was positively associated with FFR. The association was greater in obstructive disease (FFR<0.80) and at lower Pa. These findings have implications for the use of FFR to guide revascularization in patients with heart failure.

SUMMARY FOR ANNOTATED TABLE OF CONTENTS

The impact of left ventricular diastolic pressure on measurement of fractional flow reserve (FFR) is not well described. We present a hemodynamic study of the issue, concluding that increasing left ventricular diastolic pressure can increase measurements of FFR, particularly in patients with FFR<0.80 and lower blood pressure.

Diagnostic classification of the instantaneous wave-free ratio is equivalent to fractional flow reserve and is not improved with adenosine administration. Results of CLARIFY (Classification Accuracy of Pressure-Only Ratios Against Indices Using Flow Study)

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to determine if adenosine administration is required for the pressure-only assessment of coronary stenoses.

BACKGROUND

The instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) is a vasodilator-free pressure-only measure of the hemodynamic severity of a coronary stenosis comparable to fractional flow reserve (FFR) in diagnostic categorization. In this study, we used hyperemic stenosis resistance (HSR), a combined pressure-and-flow index, as an arbiter to determine when iFR and FFR disagree which index is most representative of the hemodynamic significance of the stenosis. We then test whether administering adenosine significantly improves diagnostic performance of iFR.

METHODS

In 51 vessels, intracoronary pressure and flow velocity was measured distal to the stenosis at rest and during adenosine-mediated hyperemia. The iFR (at rest and during adenosine administration [iFRa]), FFR, HSR, baseline, and hyperemic microvascular resistance were calculated using automated algorithms.

RESULTS

When iFR and FFR disagreed (4 cases, or 7.7% of the study population), HSR agreed with iFR in 50% of cases and with FFR in 50% of cases. Differences in magnitude of microvascular resistance did not influence diagnostic categorization; iFR, iFRa, and FFR had equally good diagnostic agreement with HSR (receiver-operating characteristic area under the curve 0.93 iFR vs. 0.94 iFRa and 0.96 FFR, p = 0.48).

CONCLUSIONS

iFR and FFR had equivalent agreement with classification of coronary stenosis severity by HSR. Further reduction in resistance by the administration of adenosine did not improve diagnostic categorization, indicating that iFR can be used as an adenosine-free alternative to FFR.

Comparison of effectiveness of high-dose intracoronary adenosine versus intravenous administration on the assessment of fractional flow reserve in patients with coronary heart disease

Intravenous adenosine is considered the drug of choice to obtain maximum hyperemia in the measurement of the fractional flow reserve (FFR). However, comparative studies performed between intravenous and intracoronary administration have not used high doses of intracoronary adenosine. The present study compared the efficacy and safety of high doses of intracoronary adenosine to intravenous administration when calculating the FFR. Intracoronary bolus doses of 60, 180, 300, and 600 μg adenosine were compared to an intravenous administration of 140 μg/kg/min, 200 μg/kg/min, and 140 μg/kg/min plus an intracoronary bolus of 120 μg. All the cases were performed using the radial approach. FFR was assessed in 102 patients with 108 intermediate lesions by an intracoronary pressure wire. The intracoronary dose of 60 μg was associated with a significantly greater FFR compared to the intravenous infusion (0.02 ± 0.03, p = 0.001). The intracoronary doses of 300 (-0.01 ± 0.00; p = 0.006) and 600 μg (-0.02 ± 0.00; p <0.0005) were significantly associated with a smaller FFR compared to the intravenous infusion. An intracoronary dose of 600 μg revealed a significantly greater percentage of lesions with an FFR <0.80 compared to intravenous infusion at 140 μg/kg/min (37.6 vs 31.5%; p <0.05) and 200 μg/kg/min (37.6 vs 32.4%; p <0.05) and compared to intracoronary doses of 60 (26.9%) and 180 μg (31.5%). In conclusion, an intracoronary bolus dose >300 μg can be equal to or more effective than an intravenous infusion of adenosine in achieving maximum hyperemia when calculating the FFR. Its use could simplify these procedures without having an effect on safety.

Functional assessment of coronary stenoses: can we live without it?

When selecting coronary stenoses for interventional treatment, assessment of reversible ischaemia is paramount from a symptomatic as well as prognostic point of view. Fractional flow reserve (FFR) is now considered the gold standard for invasive assessment of ischaemia. By measuring FFR in the catheterization laboratory, one can accurately identify which lesions should be stented resulting in improved patient outcome in most elective clinical and angiographic conditions. Recently, in the European Society of Cardiology guidelines on coronary revascularization, FFR was upgraded to an IA classification in multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention. In this review paper, the rationale for routine measurement of FFR will be reviewed and studies supporting its integration into everyday practice will be highlighted.