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

Deferral of left main coronary artery revascularization via IVUS or coronary physiology - Long-term outcomes from the SWEDEHEART registry

BACKGROUND

Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) guides deferral decision-making regarding the left main coronary artery (LMCA) and improves outcomes. Further studies regarding coronary physiology to guide revascularization in the LMCA are needed. Our aim was to evaluate the outcome of LMCA deferral using IVUS or coronary physiology via instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) or fractional flow reserve (FFR).

METHODS

Between January 2014 and February 2022, patients undergoing evaluation with either IVUS or coronary physiology in the LMCA were included from the SWEDEHEART registry. Exclusion criteria were a minimum luminal area < 6 mm2, iFR ≤ 0.89, FFR ≤ 0.80, ad hoc percutaneous coronary intervention of lesions in the LMCA, proximal left anterior descending artery, and proximal circumflex artery, planned elective revascularization, and planned valvular surgery. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, and unplanned revascularization. Kaplan-Meier event rates and multivariable Poisson regression were used for the statistical analyses.

RESULTS

Deferral of revascularization in the LMCA was performed in 1552 patients, 33.6 % with IVUS and 66.4 % with coronary physiology (iFR 11.3 % vs. FFR 55.0 %). The median follow-up time was 2.7 years. No significant difference was seen in MACE (IVUS 40.2 % vs. coronary physiology 35.5 %; adjusted RR: 1.18; 95 %CI: 0.97-1.44; p = 0.09). The results were consistent across all investigated subgroups. The rate of all-cause death was higher in the IVUS group (adjusted RR: 1.38; 95 %CI: 1.03-1.83; p = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Deferral of coronary revascularization in LMCA lesions using IVUS or coronary physiology did not differ in our combined endpoint. We observed a higher risk of all-cause death using IVUS.

Quantitative flow ratio versus fractional flow reserve for coronary revascularisation guidance (FAVOR III Europe): a multicentre, randomised, non-inferiority trial

BACKGROUND

Fractional flow reserve (FFR) or non-hyperaemic pressure ratios are recommended to assess functional relevance of intermediate coronary stenosis. Both diagnostic methods require the placement of a pressure wire in the coronary artery during invasive coronary angiography. Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) is an angiography-based computational method for the estimation of FFR that does not require the use of pressure wires. We aimed to investigate whether a QFR-based diagnostic strategy yields a non-inferior 12-month clinical outcome compared with an FFR-based strategy.

METHODS

FAVOR III Europe was a multicentre, randomised, open-label, non-inferiority trial comparing a QFR-based with an FFR-based diagnostic strategy for patients with intermediate coronary stenosis. Enrolment was performed in 34 centres across 11 European countries. Patients aged 18 years or older with either chronic coronary syndrome or stabilised acute coronary syndrome, and with at least one intermediate non-culprit stenosis (40-90% diameter stenosis by visual estimate; referred to here as a study lesion), were randomly assigned (1:1) to the QFR-guided or the FFR-guided group. Randomisation was done using a concealed web-based system and was stratified by diabetes and presence of a left anterior descending coronary artery study lesion. The primary endpoint was a composite of death, myocardial infarction, and unplanned revascularisation at 12 months. The predefined non-inferiority margin was 3·4% and the primary analysis was performed in the intention-to-treat population. The trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03729739) and long-term follow-up is ongoing.

FINDINGS

Between Nov 6, 2018, and July 21, 2023, 2000 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to the QFR-guided strategy (1008 patients) or the FFR-guided strategy (992 patients). The median age was 67·3 years (IQR 59·9-74·7); 1538 (76·9%) patients were male and 462 (23·1%) were female. Median follow-up time was 365 days (IQR 365-365). At 12 months, a primary endpoint event had occurred in 67 (6·7%) patients in the QFR group, and in 41 (4·2%) patients in the FFR group (hazard ratio 1·63 [95% CI 1·11-2·41]). The event proportion difference was 2·5% (90% two-sided CI 0·9-4·2). The upper limit of the 90% CI exceeded the prespecified non-inferiority margin of 3·4%. Therefore, QFR did not meet non-inferiority to FFR. A total of 18 (1·8%) patients in each group experienced an adverse procedural event, the most frequent being procedure-related myocardial infarction, which occurred in ten (1·0%) patients in the QFR group and seven (0·7%) in the FFR group. One patient in the QFR group died in relation to the index procedure.

INTERPRETATION

The results of the FAVOR III Europe trial do not support the use of QFR if FFR is available to guide revascularisation decisions in patients with intermediate coronary stenosis. This finding could have implications for current clinical guidelines recommending QFR for this purpose.

FUNDING

Medis Medical Imaging Systems and Aarhus University.

Non-invasive physiological assessment of intermediate coronary stenoses from plain angiography through artificial intelligence: the STARFLOW system

BACKGROUND

Despite evidence supporting use of fractional flow reserve (FFR) and instantaneous waves-free ratio (iFR) to improve outcome of patients undergoing coronary angiography (CA) and percutaneous coronary intervention, such techniques are still underused in clinical practice due to economic and logistic issues.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to develop an artificial intelligence (AI)-based application to compute FFR and iFR from plain CA.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Consecutive patients performing FFR or iFR or both were enrolled. A specific multi-task deep network exploiting 2 projections of the coronary of interest from standard CA was appraised. Accuracy of prediction of FFR/iFR of the AI model was the primary endpoint, along with sensitivity and specificity. Prediction was tested both for continuous values and for dichotomous classification (positive/negative) for FFR or iFR. Subgroup analyses were performed for FFR and iFR.A total of 389 patients from 5 centers were enrolled. Mean age was 67.9 ± 9.6 and 39.2% of patients were admitted for acute coronary syndrome. Overall, the accuracy was 87.3% (81.2-93.4%), with a sensitivity of 82.4% (71.9-96.4%) and a specificity of 92.2% (90.4-93.9%). For FFR, accuracy was 84.8% (77.8-91.8%), with a sensitivity of 81.9% (69.4-94.4%) and a specificity of 87.7% (85.5-89.9%), while for iFR accuracy was 90.2% (86.0-94.6%), with a sensitivity of 87.2% (76.6-97.8%) and a specificity of 93.2% (91.7-94.7%, all confidence intervals 95%).

CONCLUSION

The presented machine-learning based tool showed high accuracy in prediction of wire-based FFR and iFR.

Myocardial bridges in a pediatric population: Outcomes following a standardized approach

OBJECTIVE

To describe clinical, functional, surgical, and outcomes data in pediatric patients with a myocardial bridge (MB) evaluated and managed following a standardized approach.

METHODS

Prospective observational study included patients evaluated in the Coronary Artery Anomalies Program. Anatomy was determined by computed tomography angiography, myocardial perfusion by stress perfusion imaging, and coronary hemodynamic assessment by cardiac catheterization.

RESULTS

In total, 39 of 42 patients with a complete evaluation for MB were included (December 2012 to June 2022) at a median age of 14.1 years (interquartile range, 12.2-16.4). Sudden cardiac arrest occurred in 3 of 39 (8%), exertional symptoms in 14 (36%), and no/nonspecific symptoms in 7 (18%) patients. Exercise stress test was abnormal in 3 of 34 (9%), stress perfusion imaging in 8 of 34 (24%), and resting instantaneous wave-free ratio ≤0.89 or diastolic dobutamine fractional flow reserve ≤0.80 in 11 of 21 (52%) patients. As a result, 15 of 39 (38%) patients were determined to have hemodynamically significant MB, 1 of 15 patients started beta-blocker, and 14 of 15 were referred for surgery. Myotomy (n = 11) and coronary bypass (n = 1) were performed successfully, resulting in improved symptoms and stress testing results. One patient required pericardiocentesis postoperatively, and all were discharged without other complications. At median follow-up time of 2.9 (1.8-5.8) years, all (except 2 pending surgery) were doing well without exercise restriction.

CONCLUSIONS

Pediatric patients with MB can present with myocardial ischemia and sudden cardiac arrest. Provocative stress test and intracoronary hemodynamic tests helped risk-stratify symptomatic patients with MB and concern for ischemia. Surgical repair was safe and effective in mitigating exertional symptoms and stress test results, allowing patients to return to exercise without restriction.

Influence of the pressure wire on the fractional flow reserve calculation: CFD analysis of an ideal vessel and clinical patients with stenosis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Fractional Flow Reserve (FFR) is generally considered the gold standard in hemodynamics to assess the impact of a stenosis on the blood flow. The standard procedure to measure involves the displacement of a pressure guide along the circulatory system until it is placed next to the lesion to be analyzed. The main objective of the present study is to analyze the influence of the pressure guide on the invasive FFR measurements and its implications in clinical practice.

METHODS

We studied the influence of pressure wires on the measurement of Fractional Flow Reserve (FFR) through a combination of Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) simulations using 45 clinical patient data with 58 lesions and ideal geometries. The analysis is conducted considering patients that were subjected to a computer tomography and also have direct measurements using a pressure guide. Influence of the stenosis severity, degree of occlusion and blood viscosity has also been studied.

RESULTS

The influence of pressure wires specifically affects severe stenosis with a lumen diameter reduction of 50 % or greater. This type of stenosis leads to reduced hyperemic flow and increased coronary pressure drop. Thus, we identified that the placement of wires during FFR measurements results in partial obstruction of the coronary artery lumen, leading to increased pressure drop and subsequent reduction in blood flow. The severity of low FFR values associated with severe stenosis may be prone to overestimation when compared to stenosis without severe narrowing. These results have practical implications, particularly in the interpretation of lesions falling within the "gray zone" (0,75-0,80).

CONCLUSIONS

The pressure wire's presence significantly alters the flow on severe lesions, which has an impact on the FFR calculation. In contrast, the impact of the pressure wire appears to be reduced when the FFR is larger than 0.8. The findings provide critical information for physicians, emphasizing the need for cautious interpretation of FFR values, particularly in severe stenosis. It also offers insights into improving the correlation between FFRct models and invasive measurements by incorporating the influence of pressure wires.

State-of-the-art percutaneous coronary intervention for left main coronary artery disease in Japan

Percutaneous coronary intervention for left main coronary artery disease (LM-PCI) represents a high-risk yet life-saving procedure that has evolved significantly over the years. This review outlines the current state-of-the-art practices for LM-PCI in Japan in detail, emphasizing the integration of coronary physiology and intracoronary imaging alongside with evidence-based standardized technique using latest drug-eluting stents. These advancements enable precise lesion assessment, stent sizing, and optimal deployment, thereby enhancing procedural safety and efficacy. Despite discrepancies between current guidelines favoring coronary artery bypass grafting and real-world practice trends towards increased LM-PCI adoption, particularly in elderly populations with multiple comorbidities, careful patient selection and procedural planning are critical. Future perspectives include further refining LM-PCI through conducting randomized controlled trials integrating advanced techniques and addressing the issue of ostial left circumflex lesions and nationwide standardization of medical care for LM disease.

Clinical Advances in Cardiovascular Computed Tomography: From Present Applications to Promising Developments

PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW

This review aims to provide a profound overview on most recent studies on the clinical significance of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography (CCT) in diagnostic and therapeutic pathways. Herby, this review helps to pave the way for a more extended but yet purposefully use in modern day cardiovascular medicine.

RECENT FINDINGS

In recent years, new clinical applications of CCT have emerged. Major applications include the assessment of coronary artery disease and structural heart disease, with corresponding recommendations by major guidelines of international societies. While CCT already allows for a rapid and non-invasive diagnosis, technical improvements enable further in-depth assessments using novel imaging parameters with high temporal and spatial resolution. Those developments facilitate diagnostic and therapeutic decision-making as well as improved prognostication. This review determined that recent advancements in both hardware and software components of CCT allow for highly advanced examinations with little radiation exposure. This particularly strengthens its role in preventive care and coronary artery disease. The addition of functional analyses within and beyond coronary artery disease offers solutions in wide-ranging patient populations. Many techniques still require improvement and validation, however, CCT possesses potential to become a "one-stop-shop" examination.

Dobutamine stress echocardiography after positive CCTA: diagnostic performance using fractional flow reserve and instantaneous wave-free ratio as reference standards

AIMS

To assess the diagnostic accuracy of dobutamine stress echocardiography (DSE) in symptomatic patients with a low to intermediate pretest probability of obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) and a positive coronary CT angiography (CCTA).

METHODS

We prospectively enrolled 104 consecutive patients undergoing coronary angiography for symptoms of stable CAD and a CCTA indicative of obstructive CAD. The diagnostic performance of DSE was evaluated against two intracoronary pressure indices: (a) fractional flow reserve (FFR) with a cut-off of ≤0.80 and (b) instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) with a cut-off of ≤0.89, indicating haemodynamically significant stenoses.

RESULTS

Of 102 patients, 46 (45%) had at least one significant lesion as defined by FFR, as did 37 (36%) as defined by iFR. DSE showed positive results in 33% (34/102) of cases. The discriminative power of DSE for detecting significant CAD was moderate, with areas under the curve of 0.63 (p=0.024) compared with FFR and 0.64 (p=0.025) compared with iFR. The accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of DSE were, respectively, 61%, 43%, and 75% against FFR, and 64%, 46% and 74% against iFR. The diagnostic accuracy of DSE did not differ significantly between FFR and iFR as a reference (p=0.549).

CONCLUSION

In patients with positive CCTA, DSE has a moderate ability to identify haemodynamically significant CAD, with low sensitivity and moderate specificity. When assessed against FFR and iFR criteria, its additive diagnostic value is limited in patients with low to intermediate pretest probability of obstructive CAD.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03045601.

Hyperemic vs non-hyperemic indexes discordance: Role of epicardial and microvascular resistance (HyperDisco Study)

BACKGROUND

Literature reports a 20 % discordance between hyperemic (FFR) and non-hyperemic indexes (NHi) of coronary stenosis lesions. This work aims to develop and test clinically, a formula relating FFR and NHi (including iFR, RFR and Pd/Pa) to study their discordance.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective, single-center, clinical study enrolling all patients undergoing full coronary physiology assessment with Coroventis CoroFlow Cardiovascular System (Abbott Vascular, St. Paul, Minnesota) to validate the developed formula: [Formula: see text] where IMR(BMR) is the hyperemic (basal) microvascular resistance and HSR(BSR) is the hyperemic (basal) stenosis resistance.

RESULTS

A total of 51 patients were enrolled, 72 % male, average age 67.4 ± 8.9. Mean hemodynamic data were: FFR 0.87 ± 0.07, iFR 0.93 ± 0.05, RFR 0.91 ± 0.05, Pd/Pa 0.92 ± 0.05, BMR 76.6 ± 51.6 mmHg*s, IMR 28.4 ± 22.8 mmHg*s, BSR 5.5 ± 4.7 mmHg, HSR 3.8 ± 2.9 mmHg*s, coronary flow reserve (CFR) 2.9 ± 1.6, resistive reserve ratio (RRR) 3.3 ± 2.0. Lin's Concordance and Bland Altman analysis showed an optimal correlation between measured and estimated data. Sensitivity analysis showed that: (1) FFR can underestimate epicardial stenosis severity leading to FFR- vs NHi + discordance in case of elevated IMR, (2) NHi can overestimate epicardial stenosis severity leading to FFR- vs NHi + in the case of low BMR, (3) if BSR > HSR, FFR- vs NHi + discordance can occur, while if BSR < HSR, FFR+ vs NHi- discordance can occur.

CONCLUSION

(1) NHi can be more reliable in case of elevated IMR; (2) FFR-CFR combination can be more reliable for low BMR occurring to compensate an epicardial stenosis; (3) NHi-CFR combination can be more reliable when BSR > HSR, while FFR-CFR combination can be more reliable when BSR < HSR. The combination between pressure and flow indexes (FFR-CFR or NHi-CFR) is more reliable when compensatory mechanisms occur.

Role of physiology in the management of multivessel disease among patients with acute coronary syndrome

Multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD), defined as ≥50% stenosis in 2 or more epicardial arteries, is associated with a high burden of morbidity and mortality in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients. A salient challenge for managing this cohort is selecting the optimal revascularisation strategy, for which the use of coronary physiology has been increasingly recognised. Fractional flow reserve (FFR) is an invasive, pressure wire-based, physiological index measuring the functional significance of coronary lesions. Understanding this can help practitioners evaluate which lesions could induce myocardial ischaemia and, thus, decide which vessels require urgent revascularisation. Non-hyperaemic physiology-based indices, such as instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR), provide valid alternatives to FFR. While FFR and iFR are recommended by international guidelines in stable CAD, there is ongoing discussion regarding the role of physiology in patients with ACS and multivessel disease (MVD); growing evidence supports FFR use in the latter. Compelling findings show FFR-guided complete percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) can reduce adverse cardiovascular events, mortality, and repeat revascularisations in ACS and MVD patients compared to angiography-based PCI. However, FFR is limited in identifying non-flow-limiting vulnerable plaques, which can disadvantage high-risk patients. Here, integrating coronary physiology assessment with intracoronary imaging in decision-making can improve outcomes and quality of life. Further research into novel physiology-based tools in ACS and MVD is needed. This review aims to highlight the key evidence surrounding the role of FFR and other functional indices in guiding PCI strategy in ACS and MVD patients.

Late Outcomes of Patients in the Emergency Department With Acute Chest Pain Evaluated With Computed Tomography-Derived Fractional Flow Reserve

Computed tomography (CTA)-derived fractional flow reserve (FFRCT) guides the need for invasive coronary angiography (ICA). Late outcomes after FFRCT are reported in stable ischemic heart disease but not in acute chest pain in the emergency department (ACP-ED). The objectives are to assess the risk of death, myocardial infarction (MI), revascularization, and ICA after FFRCT. From 2015 to 2018, 389 low-risk patients with ACP-ED (negative biomarkers, no electrocardiographic ischemia) underwent CTA and FFRCT and were entered into a prospective institutional registry; patients were followed up for 41 ± 10 months. CTA stenosis ≥50% was present in 81% of the patients. Positive (FFRCT ≤0.80) and negative FFRCT were observed in 124 (32%) and 265 patients (68%), respectively. ICA was performed in 108 of 124 patients (87%) with positive FFRCT and 89 of 265 patients (34%) with negative FFRCT (p <0.00001). Revascularization was performed in 87 of 124 (70%) patients with positive FFRCT and in 22 of 265 (8%) with negative FFRCT (p <0.00001). Appropriateness of revascularization was established by blinded adjudication of ICA and invasive FFR using practice guidelines; revascularization was appropriate in 81 of 124 (65%) and 6 of 265 (2%) of FFRCT-positive and -negative patients, respectively (p <0.00001). At follow-up, for patients with positive versus negative FFRCT, the rates were 0.8% versus 0% for death (p = 0.32) and 1.6% versus 0.4% for MI (p = 0.24). In conclusion, in low-risk patients with ACP-ED who underwent CTA and FFRCT, the risk of late death (0.2%) and MI (0.7%) are low. Negative FFRCT is associated with excellent long-term prognosis, and positive FFRCT predicts obstructive disease requiring revascularization. FFRCT can safely triage patients with ACP-ED and reduce unnecessary ICA and revascularization.

Correlation and consistency between resting full-cycle ratio and fractional flow reserve in assessing coronary artery function in a Chinese real-world cohort with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome: a retrospective observational study

OBJECTIVE

The study aimed to investigate the correlation and consistency between resting full-cycle ratio (RFR) and fractional flow reserve (FFR) in functional assessment of coronary arteries in a Chinese real-world cohort with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS).

DESIGN

Retrospective study.

SETTING

A single-centre study in China.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 292 diseased vessels of 226 Chinese patients with NSTE-ACS at Cangzhou Central Hospital of Hebei Medical University from September 2021 to June 2023 were included.

METHODS

The correlation between RFR and FFR, resting ratio of distal coronary artery pressure (Pd) to aortic pressure (Pa) and FFR were analysed by using Person correlation, and the consistency between RFR and FFR, resting Pd/Pa and FFR were assessed by Bland-Altman test. The diagnostic values of RFR and resting Pd/Pa for predicting FFR≤0.80 were evaluated according to the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves.

RESULTS

RFR and resting Pd/Pa were significantly correlated with FFR, and correlation coefficients were 0.787 (p<0.001) and 0.765 (p<0.001), respectively. We found no significant differences between RFR and FFR or between resting Pd/Pa and FFR. The areas under the ROC curves for predicting FFR≤0.80 were 0.883 (p<0.001) for RFR and 0.858 (p<0.001) for resting Pd/Pa, and the optimal critical values were 0.91 for RFR and 0.93 for resting Pd/Pa. The accuracy, sensitivity, specificity and positive and negative predictive values of RFR≤0.91 for predicting FFR≤0.80 were 79.1%, 84.0%, 76.6%, 65.1% and 90.2%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The current study suggests that RFR exhibits a good correlation and consistency with FFR in patients with NSTE-ACS. RFR is expected to significantly enhance the application of coronary artery functional assessment in clinical practice, thereby providing patients with more precise revascularisation strategies.

Intracoronary Imaging for Changing Therapeutic Decisions in Patients with Multivascular Coronary Artery Disease

Background and Objectives: Atherosclerotic disease is a major contributor to heart failure, stroke, and myocardial infarction, significantly lowering the quality of life and life expectancy and placing a significant burden on healthcare. Not all lesions deemed non-significant are benign, and conversely, not all significant lesions are causative of ischemia. Fractional flow reserve (FFR) provides a functional assessment of coronary lesions, while optical coherence tomography (OCT) offers detailed imaging of plaque morphology, aiding in therapeutic decision-making. The objective of this study was to evaluate the utility of OCT and FFR as adjunctive tools in the catheterization laboratory for guiding therapeutic decisions in patients with multivessel disease for non-culprit vessels. Specifically, we aimed to assess how OCT and FFR influence therapeutic decision-making in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease. Materials and Methods: A total of 36 patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and multivessel disease were randomized 1:1 into two groups: one guided by FFR alone and the other by a combination of FFR and OCT. For the FFR group, revascularization decisions for non-culprit lesions were based solely on FFR measurements. If the FFR was >0.8, the procedure was concluded, and the patient received maximal medical treatment. If the FFR was ≤0.8, a stent was placed. For the FFR + OCT group, if the FFR was >0.8, the revascularization decision was based on OCT findings. If there were no vulnerable plaques (VP), the procedure was concluded, and the patient received maximal medical treatment. If OCT imaging indicated VP, then the patient underwent revascularization. If the FFR was ≤0.8, the patient underwent revascularization regardless of OCT findings. Results: OCT imaging altered the therapeutic decision in 11 cases where FFR measurements were above 0.8, but the lesions were characterized as VP. Analyzing the total change in the decision to stent, 4 cases in the FFR group and 15 cases in the FFR and OCT groups (4 based on FFR and 11 on OCT) revealed a statistically significant difference (p = 0.0006; Relative Risk = 0.2556; 95% CI: 0.1013 to 0.5603). When analyzing the change in the total decision both to stent and not to stent, we observed a statistically significant difference, with Group 1 having 7 cases and Group 2 having 15 cases (p = 0.0153; Relative Risk = 0.4050; 95% CI: 0.2004 to 0.7698. Conclusions: Based on the findings of this study, OCT significantly increases the percentage of stenting procedures by identifying vulnerable lesions. The use of intracoronary imaging facilitates the timely identification and treatment of these vulnerable lesions. This underscores the crucial role of OCT in enhancing the precision of coronary interventions by ensuring timely intervention for vulnerable lesions, thereby potentially improving patient outcomes.

Hybrid coronary revascularization: position paper of the European Society of Cardiology Working Group on Cardiovascular Surgery and European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions

Myocardial revascularization in coronary artery disease via percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery effectively relieves symptoms, significantly improves prognosis and quality of life when combined with guideline-directed medical therapy. Hybrid coronary revascularization is a promising alternative to percutaneous coronary intervention or CABG in selected patients and is defined as a planned and/or intended combination of consecutive CABG surgery using at least 1 internal mammary artery to the left anterior descending (LAD), and catheter-based coronary intervention to the non-LAD vessels for the treatment of multivessel disease. The main indications for hybrid coronary revascularization are (i) to achieve complete revascularization in patients who cannot undergo conventional CABG, (ii) to treat patients with acute coronary syndromes and multivessel disease with a non-LAD vessel as the culprit lesion that needs revascularization and (iii) in highly select patients with multivessel disease with complex LAD lesions and simple percutaneous coronary intervention targets for all other vessels. Hybrid coronary revascularization patients receive a left internal mammary artery graft to the LAD artery through a minimal incision along with percutaneous coronary intervention to the remaining diseased coronary vessels using latest generation drug-eluting stents. A collaborative environment with a dedicated heart team is the optimal platform to perform such interventions, which aim to improve the quality and outcome of myocardial revascularization. This position paper analyses the rationale of hybrid coronary revascularization and the currently available evidence on the various techniques and delves into the sequence of the interventions and pharmacological management during and after the procedure.

Future of invasive and non-invasive hemodynamic assessment for coronary artery disease management

Coronary artery disease represents a global health challenge. Accurate diagnosis and evaluation of hemodynamic parameters are crucial for optimizing patient management and outcomes. Nowadays a wide range of both non-invasive and invasive methods are available to assess the hemodynamic impact of both epicardial coronary stenosis and vasomotor disorders. In fact, over the years, important developments have reshaped the nature of both invasive and non-invasive diagnostic techniques, and the future holds promises for further innovation and integration. Non-invasive techniques have progressively evolved and currently a broad spectrum of methods are available, from cardiac magnetic resonance imaging with pharmacological stress and coronary computed tomography (CT) to the newer application of FFR-CT and perfusion CT. Invasive methods, on the contrary, have developed to a full-physiology approach, able not only to identify functionally significant lesions but also to evaluate microcirculation and vasospastic disease. The aim of this review is to summarize the current state-of-the-art of invasive and non-invasive hemodynamic assessment for CAD management.

The role of gender in resting full-cycle ratio (RFR) guided coronary revascularization

BACKGROUND

Gender-based differences in clinical outcomes of patients undergoing fractional flow reserved (FFR) guided coronary revascularization is well documented. This study aimed to compare resting full-cycle ratio (RFR) values between men and women and whether this translated into difference in clinical outcomes in patients who underwent RFR-guided coronary revascularization.

METHODS

This was a retrospective single-centre study of consecutive patients who underwent RFR-guided revascularization for coronary lesions with intermediate degree of stenosis. The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), unplanned revascularization, and unstable angina requiring hospital admission at one year.

RESULTS

In 373 consecutive patients (510 lesions, 26% women) there was no statistically significant difference in RFR value between men and women (0.90 ± 10 versus 0.90 ± 11, P = 0.95). There was no statistically significant difference between men and women in the primary endpoint, even after adjustment to the imbalance between the two groups [3.7% vs. 3.0%; HR 1.43, 95% CI (0.46 to 4.43), P = 0.54]; or its individual components of death (1.1% vs 0.8%, P = 0.76), MI (1.9% vs 0.8%, P = 0.38) or unplanned revascularization, including unstable angina admissions (2.6% vs 2.3%, P = 0.82). The comparable clinical outcomes were consistent across all different subgroups, including clinical presentation, diabetes status, left ventricle systolic function, kidney function, and the interrogated coronary artery.

CONCLUSION

Our study suggests no significant gender-based difference in the value of RFR or 1-year clinical outcomes in patients undergoing resting physiology guided coronary revascularization.

A Convolutional-Transformer Model for FFR and iFR Assessment From Coronary Angiography

The quantification of stenosis severity from X-ray catheter angiography is a challenging task. Indeed, this requires to fully understand the lesion's geometry by analyzing dynamics of the contrast material, only relying on visual observation by clinicians. To support decision making for cardiac intervention, we propose a hybrid CNN-Transformer model for the assessment of angiography-based non-invasive fractional flow-reserve (FFR) and instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) of intermediate coronary stenosis. Our approach predicts whether a coronary artery stenosis is hemodynamically significant and provides direct FFR and iFR estimates. This is achieved through a combination of regression and classification branches that forces the model to focus on the cut-off region of FFR (around 0.8 FFR value), which is highly critical for decision-making. We also propose a spatio-temporal factorization mechanisms that redesigns the transformer's self-attention mechanism to capture both local spatial and temporal interactions between vessel geometry, blood flow dynamics, and lesion morphology. The proposed method achieves state-of-the-art performance on a dataset of 778 exams from 389 patients. Unlike existing methods, our approach employs a single angiography view and does not require knowledge of the key frame; supervision at training time is provided by a classification loss (based on a threshold of the FFR/iFR values) and a regression loss for direct estimation. Finally, the analysis of model interpretability and calibration shows that, in spite of the complexity of angiographic imaging data, our method can robustly identify the location of the stenosis and correlate prediction uncertainty to the provided output scores.

The Usefulness of Coregistration with iFR in Tandem or Long Diffuse Coronary Lesions: The iLARDI Randomized Clinical Trial

Background. Despite technical advancements, patients with sequential or diffuse coronary lesions undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) have an increased risk of cardiovascular events at follow-up. We aimed to analyze the utility of a SyncVision/iFR (S-iFR)-guided PCI strategy versus an angiography-guided strategy in patients with this type of lesions. Methods. Randomized, multicenter, controlled, and open-label trial to compare S-iFR versus angiography-guided PCI in patients with sequential or diffuse angiographic coronary stenosis (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04283734). The primary endpoint was the implanted stent length. The main secondary endpoint was targeting vessel failure (TVF) at one year. Results. A total of 100 patients underwent randomization, with 49 patients assigned to the S-iFR group and 51 to the angiography-guided PCI group. There were no differences between groups regarding clinical and anatomical characteristics. The baseline iFR was 0.71 ± 0.16 vs. 0.67 ± 0.19 (p = 0.279) in the S-iFR and angiography group, respectively. The mean lesion length was 42.3 ± 12 mm and 39.8 ± 12 (p = 0.297). The implanted stent length was 32.7 ± 17.2 mm in the S-iFR group and 43.1 ± 14.9 mm in the angiography group (mean difference, -10.4 mm; 95% confidence interval [CI], -16.9 to -4.0; p = 0.002). At one year, target vessel failure (TVF) occurred in four patients: three (6.1%) in the S-iFR group vs. one (1.9%) in the angiography group (p = 0.319). Conclusions. Among patients with sequential or long diffuse coronary lesions, a S-iFR-guided PCI strategy resulted in a reduction of the total stent length compared to an angiography-guided PCI strategy. A nonsignificant increase in TVF was observed in the S-iFR group.

Myocardial Ischemia: Differentiating between Epicardial Coronary Artery Atherosclerosis, Microvascular Dysfunction and Vasospasm in the Catheterization Laboratory

Ischemic heart disease is currently the most common cause of mortality and morbidity worldwide. Although myocardial ischemia is classically determined by epicardial coronary atherosclerosis, up to 40% of patients referred for coronary angiography have no obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD). Ischemia with non-obstructive coronary artery disease (INOCA) has typically been underestimated in the past because, until recently, its prognostic significance was not completely clear. This review aims to highlight differences and patterns in myocardial ischemia caused by epicardial obstructive CAD, coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMD) or vasomotor abnormalities and to elucidate the state of the art in correctly diagnosing these different patterns.

Assessment of Coronary Stenoses for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

Evidence regarding the comparative efficacy of the different methods to determine the significance of coronary stenoses in the catheterization laboratory is lacking. We aimed to compare all available methods guiding the decision to perform percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We searched Medline, Embase, and CENTRAL until October 5, 2023. We included trials that randomized patients with greater than 30% stenoses who were considered for PCI and reported major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). We performed a frequentist random-effects network meta-analysis and assessed the certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. We included 15 trials with 16,333 participants with a mean weighted follow-up of 34 months. The trials contained a median of 49.3% (interquartile range: 32.6%, 100%) acute coronary syndrome participants. Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) was associated with a decreased risk of MACE compared with coronary angiography (CA) (risk ratio [RR] 0.68, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.56 to 0.82, high certainty), fractional flow reserve (FFR) (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.92, moderate certainty), and instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.82, moderate certainty), and ranked first for MACE (88.1% probability of being the best). FFR (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.06, moderate certainty) and iFR (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.28, moderate certainty) likely did not decrease the risk of MACE compared with CA. Intravascular imaging may not be associated with a significant decrease in MACE compared with CA (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.17, low certainty) when used to guide the decision to perform PCI. In conclusion, a decision to perform PCI based on QFR was associated with a decreased risk of MACE compared with CA, FFR, and iFR in a mixed stable coronary disease and acute coronary syndrome population. These hypothesis-generating findings should be validated in large, randomized, head-to-head trials.

Impact of Chronic Kidney Disease on the Coronary Revascularization Guided by Intracoronary Physiology: Results of the First Registry with Long-Term Follow-Up in a Latin American Population

The use of invasive physiology methods in patients with renal dysfunction is not well elucidated. Our objective was to evaluate the in-hospital and long-term results of using intracoronary physiology to guide revascularization in patients with chronic kidney disease. In this retrospective study, we evaluated 151 patients from January 2018 to January 2022, divided into 2 groups: CKD (81 patients [114 lesions]) and non-CKD (70 patients [117 lesions]). The mean age was higher (p < 0.001), body mass index was lower (p = 0.007), contrast volume used was lower (p = 0.02) and the number of ischemic lesions/patients was higher (p = 0.005) in the CKD group. The primary outcomes (rate of major adverse cardiac events during follow-up, defined as death, infarction, and need for new revascularization) in the CKD and non-CKD groups were 22.07% and 14.92%, respectively (p = 0.363). There was a significant difference in the target lesion revascularization (TLR) rate (11.68%, CKD group vs. 1.49%, non-CKD group, p = 0.02), this initial statistical difference was not significant after adjusting for variables in the logistic regression model. There was no difference between the rates of death from all causes (6.49%, CKD group vs. 1.49%, non-CKD group, p = 0.15), reinfarction (3.89%, CKD group vs. 1.49%, non-CKD group, p = 0.394), and need for new revascularization (11.68%, CKD group vs. 5.97%, non-CKD group, p = 0.297). As there was no difference in the endpoints between groups with long-term follow-up, this study demonstrated the safety of using intracoronary physiology to guide revascularization in patients with CKD.

A Novel Method for Angiographic Contrast-Based Diagnosis of Stenosis in Coronary Artery Disease: In Vivo and In Vitro Analyses

BACKGROUND

The existing diagnostic methods for coronary artery disease (CAD), such as coronary angiography and fractional flow reserve (FFR), have limitations regarding their invasiveness, cost, and discomfort. We explored a novel diagnostic approach, coronary contrast intensity analysis (CCIA), and conducted a comparative analysis between it and FFR.

METHODS

We used an in vitro coronary-circulation-mimicking system with nine stenosis models representing various stenosis lengths (6, 18, and 30 mm) and degrees (30%, 50%, and 70%). The angiographic brightness values were analyzed for CCIA. The in vivo experiments included 15 patients with a normal sinus rhythm. Coronary angiography was performed, and arterial movement was tracked, enabling CCIA derivation. The CCIA values were compared with the FFR (n = 15) and instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR; n = 11) measurements.

RESULTS

In vitro FFR showed a consistent trend related to the length and severity of stenosis. The CCIA was related to stenosis but had a weaker correlation with length, except for with 70% stenosis (6 mm: 0.82 ± 0.007, 0.68 ± 0.007, 0.61 ± 0.004; 18 mm: 0.78 ± 0.052, 0.69 ± 0.025, 0.44 ± 0.016; 30 mm: 0.80 ± 0.018, 0.64 ± 0.006, 0.40 ± 0.026 at 30%, 50%, and 70%, respectively). In vitro CCIA and FFR were significantly correlated (R = 0.9442, p < 0.01). The in vivo analysis revealed significant correlations between CCIA and FFR (R = 0.5775, p < 0.05) and the iFR (n = 11, R = 0.7578, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

CCIA is a promising alternative for diagnosing stenosis in patients with CAD. The initial in vitro validation and in vivo confirmation in patients demonstrate the feasibility of applying CCIA during coronary angiography. Further clinical studies are warranted to fully evaluate the diagnostic accuracy and potential impact of CCIA on CAD management.

Use of coronary physiology to guide revascularization in clinical practice: results of the F(FR)2 registry

BACKGROUND

Despite the recommendation of coronary physiology to guide revascularization in angiographically intermediate stenoses without established correlation to ischemia, its uptake in clinical practice is slow.

AIMS

This study aimed to analyze the use of coronary physiology in clinical practice.

METHODS

Based on a multicenter registry (Fractional Flow Reserve Fax Registry, F(FR)2, ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT03055910), clinical use, consequences, and complications of coronary physiology were systematically analyzed.

RESULTS

F(FR)2 enrolled 2,000 patients with 3,378 intracoronary pressure measurements. Most measurements (96.8%) were performed in angiographically intermediate stenoses. Out of 3,238 lesions in which coronary physiology was used to guide revascularization, revascularization was deferred in 2,643 (78.2%) cases. Fractional flow reserve (FFR) was the most common pressure index used (87.6%), with hyperemia induced by an intracoronary bolus of adenosine in 2,556 lesions (86.4%) and intravenous adenosine used for 384 measurements (13.0%). The route of adenosine administration did not influence FFR results (change-in-estimate -3.1% for regression model predicting FFR from diameter stenosis). Agreement with the subsequent revascularization decision was 93.4% for intravenous and 95.0% for intracoronary adenosine (p = 0.261). Coronary artery occlusion caused by the pressure wire was reported in two cases (0.1%) and dissection in three cases (0.2%), which was fatal once (0.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

In clinical practice, intracoronary pressure measurements are mostly used to guide revascularization decisions in angiographically intermediate stenoses. Intracoronary and intravenous administration of adenosine seem equally suited. While the rate of serious complications of wire-based intracoronary pressure measurements in clinical practice seems to be low, it is not negligible.

Timing of fractional flow reserve-guided complete revascularization in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction with multivessel disease: Rationale and design of the OPTION-STEMI trial

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines recommend complete revascularization (CR) in hemodynamically stable patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and multivessel coronary artery disease (MVD). With regard to the timing of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for non-infarct-related artery (non-IRA), recent randomized clinical trials have revealed that immediate CR was non-inferior to staged CR. However, the optimal timing of CR remains uncertain. The OPTION-STEMI trial compared immediate CR and in-hospital staged CR guided by fractional flow reserve (FFR) for intermediate stenosis of the non-IRA.

METHODS

The OPTION-STEMI is a multicenter, investigator-initiated, prospective, open-label, non-inferiority randomized clinical trial. The study included patients with at least 1 non-IRA lesion with ≥50% stenosis by visual estimation. Patients fulfilling the inclusion criteria were randomized into 2 groups at a 1:1 ratio: immediate CR (i.e., PCI for the non-IRA performed during primary angioplasty) or in-hospital staged CR. In the in-hospital staged CR group, PCI for non-IRA lesions was performed on another day during the index hospitalization. Non-IRA lesions with 50%-69% stenosis by visual estimation were evaluated by FFR, whereas those with ≥70% stenosis was revascularized without FFR. The primary endpoint was the composite of all-cause death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and all unplanned revascularization at 1 year after randomization. Enrolment began in December 2019 and was completed in January 2024. The follow-up for the primary endpoint will be completed in January 2025, and primary results will be available in the middle of 2025.

CONCLUSIONS

The OPTION-STEMI is a multicenter, non-inferiority, randomized trial that evaluated the timing of in-hospital CR with the aid of FFR in patients with STEMI and MVD.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov. Unique identifier: NCT04626882; and URL: https://cris.nih.go.kr. Unique identifier: KCT0004457.

Physiological Assessment with iFR prior to FFR Measurement in Left Main Disease

Despite guideline-based recommendation of the interchangeable use of instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) and fractional flow reserve (FFR) to guide revascularization decision-making, iFR/FFR could demonstrate different physiological or clinical outcomes in some specific patient or lesion subsets. Therefore, we sought to investigate the impact of difference between iFR and FFR-guided revascularization decision-making on clinical outcomes in patients with left main disease (LMD). In this international multicenter registry of LMD with physiological interrogation, we identified 275 patients in whom physiological assessment was performed with both iFR/FFR. Major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) was defined as a composite of death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization. The receiver-operating characteristic analysis was performed for both iFR/FFR to predict MACE in respective patients in whom revascularization was deferred and performed. In 153 patients of revascularization deferral, MACE occurred in 17.0% patients. The optimal cut-off values of iFR and FFR to predict MACE were 0.88 (specificity:0.74; sensitivity:0.65) and 0.76 (specificity:0.81; sensitivity:0.46), respectively. The area under the curve (AUC) was significantly higher for iFR than FFR (0.74; 95%CI 0.62-0.85 vs. 0.62; 95%CI 0.48-0.75; p = 0.012). In 122 patients of coronary revascularization, MACE occurred in 13.1% patients. The optimal cut-off values of iFR and FFR were 0.92 (specificity:0.93; sensitivity:0.25) and 0.81 (specificity:0.047; sensitivity:1.00), respectively. The AUCs were not significantly different between iFR and FFR (0.57; 95%CI 0.40-0.73 vs. 0.46; 95%CI 0.31-0.61; p = 0.43). While neither baseline iFR nor FFR was predictive of MACE in patients in whom revascularization was performed, iFR-guided deferral seemed to be safer than FFR-guided deferral.

Advances in Clinical Cardiology 2023: A Summary of Key Clinical Trials

INTRODUCTION

Over the course of 2023, numerous key clinical trials with valuable contributions to clinical cardiology were published or presented at major international conferences. This review seeks to summarise these trials and reflect on their clinical context.

METHODS

The authors collated and reviewed clinical trials presented at major cardiology conferences during 2023 including the American College of Cardiology (ACC), European Association for Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EuroPCR), European Society of Cardiology (ESC), Transcatheter Cardiovascular Therapeutics (TCT), American Heart Association (AHA), European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA), Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI), TVT-The Heart Summit (TVT) and Cardiovascular Research Technologies (CRT). Trials with a broad relevance to the cardiology community and those with potential to change current practice were included.

RESULTS

A total of 80 key cardiology clinical trials were identified for inclusion. Key trials in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and antiplatelet management such as HOST-IDEA, T-PASS and STOP-DAPT3 were included in addition to several pivotal interventional trials such as ORBITA 2, MULTISTARS-AMI, ILUMIEN-IV, OCTIVUS and OCTOBER. Additionally, several trials evaluated new stent design and technology such as BIOSTEMI, PARTHENOPE and TRANSFORM. Structural intervention trials included long-term data from PARTNER 3, new data on the durability of transcatheter aortic valve intervention (TAVI), in addition to major new trials regarding transcatheter tricuspid valve intervention from TRISCEND II. Heart failure (HF) and prevention covered several key studies including DAPA-MI, STEP-HF, ADVOR, DICTATE HF and CAMEO-DAPA. In cardiac devices and electrophysiology, several trial exploring novel ablation strategies in atrial fibrillation (AF) such as PULSED AF and ADVENT were presented with further data evaluating the efficacy of anticoagulation in subclinical AF in NOAH-AFNET 6, FRAIL AF and AZALEA-TIMI 71.

CONCLUSION

This article presents a summary of key clinical cardiology trials published and presented during the past year and should be of interest to both practising clinicians and researchers.

Clinical impact of coronary revascularization over medical treatment in chronic coronary syndromes: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To provide a quantitative comparison between myocardial revascularization (REVASC) and optimal medical treatment (OMT) alone in patients with chronic coronary syndrome (CCS).

METHODS

Pertinent studies were searched for in PubMed/Medline until 12/03/2023. Randomized controlled trials that compare REVASC to OMT reporting clinical outcomes were selected according to PRISMA guidelines. The primary outcome was cardiovascular death. Two investigators independently assessed the study quality and extracted data.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight randomized controlled studies (RCTs) including 20692 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The rate of cardiovascular mortality was significantly lower among patients treated with myocardial revascularization [risk ratio (RR) 0.79, 95% CI 0.69-0.90]. Age (p = 0.03), multivessel disease (p < 0.001), and follow-up duration (p = 0.001) were significant moderators of CV mortality. Subgroup analyses showed a larger benefit in patients treated with drug-eluting stents and those without chronic total occlusion. Among secondary outcomes, myocardial infarction was less frequent in the REVASC group (RR = 0.74; p < 0.001), while no significant difference was found for all-cause mortality (p = 0.09) nor stroke (p = 0.26).

CONCLUSIONS

The present analysis showed lower rates of CV mortality and myocardial infarction in CCS patients treated with myocardial revascularization compared to OMT. This benefit was larger with increasing follow-up duration. Personalized treatment based on patient characteristics and lesion complexity may optimize clinical outcomes in patients with CCS.

Effect of prolonged pressure equalization on final drifting during pressure wire studies

Pressure drifting is a troublesome error in invasive coronary function tests. This study aimed to evaluate the relationship between prolonged and short-time pressure equalizations in pressure drifting. Pressure drifting was defined as the pressure gradient between the mean pressure of the distal wire sensor (Pd) and aortic pressure (Pa) when the wire was withdrawn to the tip of the guiding catheter. Significant drifts 1 and 2 were defined as the absolute values of pressure gradients > 2 and > 3 mmHg, respectively. A logistic regression model was used to evaluate the associations between prolonged pressure equalization and each pressure drifting. The prolonged pressure equalization strategy was associated with a lower incidence of drift 1 than the short-time pressure equalization strategy (6.84% vs. 16.92%, p < 0.05). However, no statistical differences were found in the incidence of drift 2 between the prolonged and short-time pressure equalization strategies (4.27% vs. 7.69%, p = 0.34). In the multivariable regression model, only the prolonged pressure equalization strategy predicted a lower incidence of pressure drift 1. In conclusion, the prolonged pressure equalization strategy was associated with a lower incidence of significant pressure drifting with more stringent thresholds than the short-time pressure equalization strategy.

Diagnosing Coronary Artery Disease in the Patient Presenting with Stable Ischemic Heart Disease: The Role of Anatomic versus Functional Testing

There are unique advantages and disadvantages to functional versus anatomic testing in the work-up of patients who present with symptoms suggestive of obstructive coronary artery disease. Evaluation of these individuals starts with an assessment of pre-test probability, which guides subsequent testing decisions. The choice between anatomic and functional testing depends on this pre-test probability. In general, anatomic testing has particular utility among younger individuals and women; while functional testing can be helpful to rule-in ischemia and guide revascularization decisions. Ultimately, selection of the most appropriate test should be individualized to the patient and clinical scenario.

Evaluation of Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio and Fractional Flow Reserve in Severe Aortic Valve Stenosis

BACKGROUND

The optimal functional evaluation of coronary artery stenosis in patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) has not been established. The objective of the study was to evaluate the instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) and fractional flow reserve (FFR) in patients with and without severe AS.

METHODS

We retrospectively investigated 395 lesions in 293 patients with severe AS and 2257 lesions in 1882 patients without severe AS between 2010 and 2022 from a subgroup of the Interventional Cardiology Research In-Cooperation Society FFR Registry. All patients had FFR values, and iFR was analyzed post hoc using dedicated software only in lesions with adequate resting pressure curves (311 lesions in patients with severe AS and 2257 lesions in patients with nonsevere AS).

RESULTS

The incidence of iFR ≤0.89 was 66.6% and 31.8% (P<0.001), while the incidence of FFR ≤0.80 was 45.3% and 43.9% (P=0.60) in the severe AS group and the nonsevere AS group, respectively. In the severe AS group, most lesions (95.2%) with iFR >0.89 had FFR >0.80, while 36.2% of lesions with iFR ≤0.89 had FFR >0.80. During a median follow-up of 2 years, FFR ≤0.80 was significantly associated with deferred lesion failure (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.71 [95% CI, 1.08-6.80]; P=0.034), while iFR ≤0.89 showed no prognostic value (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.31 [95% CI, 0.47-3.60]; P=0.60) in the severe AS group. Lesions with iFR ≤0.89 and FFR >0.80, in particular, were not associated with a higher rate of deferred lesion failure at 3 years compared with lesions with iFR >0.89 (15.4% versus 17.0%; P=0.58).

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggested that FFR appears to be less affected by the presence of severe AS and is more associated with prognosis. iFR may overestimate the functional severity of coronary artery disease without prognostic significance, yet it can be useful for excluding significant stenosis in patients with severe AS.

Validation of resting full-cycle ratio and diastolic pressure ratio with [15O]H2O positron emission tomography myocardial perfusion

Fractional flow reserve (FFR) and instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) are invasive techniques used to evaluate the hemodynamic significance of coronary artery stenosis. These methods have been validated through perfusion imaging and clinical trials. New invasive pressure ratios that do not require hyperemia have recently emerged, and it is essential to confirm their diagnostic efficacy. The aim of this study was to validate the resting full-cycle ratio (RFR) and the diastolic pressure ratio (dPR), against [15O]H2O positron emission tomography (PET) imaging. A total of 129 symptomatic patients with an intermediate risk of coronary artery disease (CAD) were included. All patients underwent cardiac [15O]H2O PET with quantitative assessment of resting and hyperemic myocardial perfusion. Within a 2 week period, coronary angiography was performed. Intracoronary pressure measurements were obtained in 320 vessels and RFR, dPR, and FFR were computed. PET derived regional hyperemic myocardial blood flow (hMBF) and myocardial perfusion reserve (MPR) served as reference standards. In coronary arteries with stenoses (43%, 136 of 320), the overall diagnostic accuracies of RFR, dPR, and FFR did not differ when PET hyperemic MBF < 2.3 ml min-1 (69.9%, 70.6%, and 77.1%, respectively) and PET MPR < 2.5 (70.6%, 71.3%, and 66.9%, respectively) were considered as the reference for myocardial ischemia. Non-significant differences between the areas under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve were found between the different indices. Furthermore, the integration of FFR with RFR (or dPR) does not enhance the diagnostic information already achieved by FFR in the characterization of ischemia via PET perfusion. In conclusion, the novel non-hyperemic pressure ratios, RFR and dPR, have a diagnostic performance comparable to FFR in assessing regional myocardial ischemia. These findings suggest that RFR and dPR may be considered as an FFR alternative for invasively guiding revascularization treatment in symptomatic patients with CAD.

Comparison among various physiology and angiography-guided strategies for deferring percutaneous coronary intervention: A network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

It is unclear whether coronary physiology or coronary angiography (CA)-guided strategy is the more preferable approach for deferring percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We sought to evaluate the clinical efficacy of various PCI strategies through a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

METHODS/MATERIALS

We searched multiple databases for RCTs investigating the impact of the following strategies for the purpose of determining whether or not to defer PCI: fractional flow reserve, instantaneous wave-free ratio, quantitative flow ratio (QFR), and CA. We conducted a network meta-analysis for trial-defined major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), all-cause death, cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction (MI), target lesion revascularization (TLR), and stent thrombosis. We performed a subgroup analysis for those with acute coronary syndrome (ACS).

RESULTS

Our search identified 12 eligible RCTs including a total of 13,177 patients. QFR-guided PCI was associated with reduced MACE, MI, and TLR compared with CA-guided PCI (relative risk (RR) 0.68; 95 % confidence interval (CI] [0.49 to 0.94], RR 0.58; 95 % CI [0.36 to 0.96], and RR 0.58; 95 % CI [0.38 to 0.91], respectively). There were no significant differences in any pairs for all-cause death, cardiovascular death, or stent thrombosis. QFR was ranked the best in most outcomes. In the subgroup analysis of the ACS cohort, there were no significant differences in MACE between any comparisons.

CONCLUSIONS

QFR was associated with reduced MACE, MI, and TLR compared with CA, and ranked the best in most outcomes. However, this was not applied in the ACS cohort.

Fractional flow reserve and instantaneous wave-free ratio in coronary artery bypass grafting: a meta-analysis and practice review

Objective

Fractional flow reserve (FFR) and instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) are invasive methods to assess the functional significance of intermediate severity coronary lesions. Both indexes have been extensively validated in clinical trials in guiding revascularisation in patients with stable ischaemic heart disease undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with improved clinical outcomes. However, the role of these tools in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is less clear.

Methods

A meta-analysis of randomised trials and observational studies was carried out to help in determining the optimal strategy for assessing lesion severity and selecting graft targets in patients undergoing CABG. Electronic searches were carried out on Embase, MEDLINE, and Web of Science. A group of four authors independently screened and then assessed the retrieved records. Cochrane's Risk of Bias and Robins-I tools were used for bias assessment. A survey was conducted among surgeons and cardiologists to describe current attitudes towards the preoperative use of functional coronary investigations in practice.

Results

Clinical outcomes including mortality at 30 days, perioperative myocardial infarction, number of grafts, incidence of stroke, rate of further need for revascularisation, and patient-reported quality of life did not differ in CABG guided by functional testing from those guided by traditional angiography.The survey revealed that in half of the surgical and cardiology units functional assessment is performed in CABG patients; there is a general perception that functional testing has improved patient care and its use would clarify the role of moderate coronary lesions that often need multidisciplinary rediscussions; moderate stenosis are felt to be clinically relevant; and anatomical considerations need to be taken into account together with functional assessment.

Conclusions

At present, the evidence to support the routine use of functional testing in intermediate lesions for planning CABG is currently insufficient. The pooled data currently available do not show an increased risk in mortality, myocardial injury, and stroke in the FFR/iFR-guided group. Further trials with highly selected populations are needed to clarify the best strategy.

Systematic Review Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier (CRD42023414604).

Anomalous Coronary Arteries: A State-of-the-Art Approach

Congenital coronary anomalies are not an infrequent occurrence and their clinical presentation typically occurs during early years, though may be manifested only in adulthood. In the setting of anomalous aortic origin of a coronary artery, this is particularly concerning as it inflicts sudden loss of healthy young lives. Risk stratification remains a challenge and so does the best management decision-making in these patients, particularly if asymptomatic. Standardized approach to evaluation and management, with careful data collection and collaboration among centers, will likely impact future outcomes in this patient population, thus allowing for exercise participation and healthier lives.

Diagnostic performance of angiography-derived fractional flow reserve and CT-derived fractional flow reserve: A systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Accumulating evidence has demonstrated that fractional flow reserves (FFRs) derived from invasive coronary angiograms (CA-FFRs) and coronary computed tomography angiography-derived FFRs (CT-FFRs) are promising alternatives to wire-based FFRs. However, it remains unclear which method has better diagnostic performance. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the diagnostic performances of the two approaches.

METHODS

The Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, Medline (Ovid), the Chinese China National Knowledge Infrastructure Database (CNKI), VIP, and WanFang Data databases were searched for relevant studies that included comparisons between CA-FFR and CT-FFR, from their respective database inceptions until January 1, 2023. Studies where both noninvasive FFR (including CA-FFR and CT-FFR) and invasive FFR (as a reference standard) were performed for the diagnosis of ischemic coronary artery disease and were designed as prospective, paired diagnostic studies, were pulled. The diagnostic test accuracy method and Bayesian hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (ROC) model for network meta-analysis (NMA) of diagnostic tests (HSROC-NMADT) were both used to perform a meta-analysis on the data.

RESULTS

Twenty-six studies were included in this NMA. The results from both the diagnostic test accuracy and HSROC-NMADT methods revealed that the diagnostic accuracy of CA-FFR was higher than that of CT-FFR, in terms of sensitivity (Se; 0.86 vs. 0.84), specificity (Sp; 0.90 vs. 0.78), positive predictive value (PPV; 0.83 vs. 0.70), and negative predictive value (NPV; 0.91 vs. 0.89) for the detection of myocardial ischemia. A cumulative ranking curve analysis indicated that CA-FFR had a higher diagnostic accuracy than CT-FFR in the context of this study, with a higher area under the ROC curve (AUC; 0.94 vs. 0.87).

CONCLUSIONS

Although both of these two commonly used virtual FFR methods showed high levels of diagnostic accuracy, we demonstrated that CA-FFR had a better Se, Sp, PPV, NPV, and AUC than CT-FFR. However, this study provided only indirect comparisions; therefore, larger studies are warranted to directly compare the diagnostic performances of these two approaches.

Diagnostic Performance of Diastolic Hyperemia-Free Ratio Compared With Invasive Fractional Flow Reserve for Evaluation of Coronary Artery Disease

Hyperemic and nonhyperemic pressure ratios are frequently used to assess the hemodynamic significance of coronary artery disease and to guide the need for myocardial revascularization. However, there are limited data on the diagnostic performance of the diastolic hyperemia-free ratio (DFR). We evaluated the diagnostic performance of the DFR compared with invasive fractional flow reserve (FFR). We performed a prospective, single-center study of 308 patients (343 lesions) who underwent DFR and FFR for evaluation of visually estimated 40% to 90% stenoses. Diagnostic performance of the DFR compared with FFR was evaluated using linear regression, Bland-Altman analysis, and receiver operating characteristic curves. The overall diagnostic accuracy of the DFR was 83%; the accuracy rates were 86%, 40%, and 95% when the DFR was <0.86, 0.88 to 0.90, and >0.93, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predicative value, and negative predictive value were 60%, 91%, 71%, and 87%, respectively. The Pearson correlation coefficient was 0.75 (p <0.05). The Bland-Altman analysis showed a mean difference of 0.09, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.88 (95% confidence interval 0.84 to 0.92, p <0.05). In conclusion, the DFR has a good diagnostic performance compared with FFR but 17% of the measurements were discordant. The diagnostic accuracy of the DFR was only 40% when the DFR was 0.88 to 0.90, suggesting that FFR may be useful in these arteries.

Diagnostic performances of Nonhyperemic Pressure Ratios and Coronary Angiography-Based Fractional Flow Reserve against conventional Wire-Based Fractional Flow Reserve

BACKGROUND

Nonhyperemic pressure ratios (NHPRs) have been proposed as alternatives to fractional flow reserve (FFR) without induction of hyperemia. More recently, imaging based-FFR estimation, especially coronary angiography-derived FFR (Angio-FFR) measurement, is proposed to estimate wire-based FFR. However, little is known about the diagnostic performance of these indices against conventional FFR.

AIMS

We aimed to assess and compare the diagnostic performance of both NHPRs and coronary Angio-FFR against wire-based conventional FFR.

METHODS

PubMed and Embase databases were systematically searched for peer-reviewed original articles up to 08/2022. The primary outcomes were the pooled sensitivity and specificity as well as the area under the curve (AUC) of the summary receiver-operating characteristic curve of those indices.

RESULTS

A total of 6693 records were identified after a literature search, including 37 reports for NHPRs and 34 for Angio-FFR. Overall, NHPRs have a lower diagnostic performance in estimating wire-based FFR with an AUC of 0.85 (0.81, 0.88) when compared with Angio-FFR of 0.95 (0.93, 0.97). When all four modalities of NHPRs (iFR, Pd/Pa, DPR, RFR) were compared, those had overlapping AUCs without major differences among each other. Similarly, when the two most commonly used Angio-FFR (QFR, FFR angio ) were compared, those had overlapping AUCs without major differences among each other.

CONCLUSION

Angio-FFR may offer a better estimation of wire-based FFR than NHPRs. Our results support a wider use of Angio-FFR in the cardiac catheterization laboratory to streamline our workflow for coronary physiologic assessment.

CLASSIFICATIONS

FFR,, stable ischemic disease and non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome.

Operator decision-making in angiography-only guided revascularization for lesions not indicated for FFR: a QFR-based functional assessment in chronic coronary syndrome

Background

Discordance between coronary angiographic findings and invasive functional significance is well-established. Yet, the prevalence of this mismatch in an era increasingly utilizing invasive functional assessments, such as fractional flow reserve (FFR), remains unclear. This study examines the extent of such discrepancies in current clinical practice.

Methods

This single-center prospective registry included consecutive patients with chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) who underwent elective coronary angiography, with or without revascularization. Coronary angiograms deemed not requiring FFR due to clear anatomical distinctions, either anatomically severe indicating a need for revascularization or mild suggesting no need for intervention, were selected for evaluation. These were then subjected to post-hoc analysis by three independent operators who were blinded to the definitive treatment strategies. Importantly, the post-hoc analysis was conducted in two distinct phases: firstly, a re-evaluation of coronary stenosis, and secondly, a separate functional assessment, each carried out independently. Coronary stenosis severity was assessed visually, while functional relevance was determined by quantitative flow ratio (QFR), calculated using a computational fluid dynamics algorithm applied to angiographic images. Analysis focused on discrepancies between QFR-based functional indications and revascularization strategies actually performed.

Results

In 191 patients, 488 vessels were analyzed. Average diameter stenosis (DS) was 37 ± 34%, and QFR was 0.87 ± 0.15, demonstrating a moderate correlation (r = -0.84; 95% CI: -0.86 to -0.81, p < 0.01). Agreement with QFR at conventional anatomical cutoffs was 88% for 50% DS and 91% for 70% DS. Mismatches between revascularization decisions and QFR indications occurred in 10% of cases. Discrepancies were more frequent in the left anterior descending artery (14%) compared to the left circumflex (6%) and the right coronary artery (9%; p = 0.07).

Conclusion

In a cardiac-center where FFR utilization is high, discordance between coronary angiography and functional significance persists, even when operators are confident in their decisions not to use functional interrogation. This gap, most evident in the left anterior descending artery, highlights the potential need for integrated angiography-based functional assessments to refine revascularization decisions in CCS.

Impact of Sex Differences on the Outcomes of Coronary Invasive Physiological Assessment: Long-Term Follow-Up in a Brazilian Population

Objective

This study aimed to evaluate the rate of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs; the sum of death, myocardial infarction, and revascularization rates) according to interventional strategies guided by invasive physiological methods in both sexes in a Brazilian population during long-term follow-up for an average of 2 years.

Methods

This retrospective single-center study included 151 consecutive patients (232 lesions) between January 2018 and January 2022. The participants were divided into two groups: the female group (FG), comprising 59 patients with 88 lesions, and the male group (MG), comprising 92 patients with 144 lesions.

Results

The FG had a greater mean age (FG: 67.96 ± 13.12 vs. MG: 62.36 ± 12.01 years, p = 0.009) and lower mean creatinine clearance (FG: 79.35 ± 38.63 vs. MG: 92.02 ± 38.62 mL/min, p = 0.02) than did the MG. The percentage of lesions in the left main coronary artery was higher in the FG than in the MG (12.5% vs. 2.78%, p = 0.006). The mean follow-up time was longer in the MG than in the FG (795.61 ± 350 vs. 619.19 ± 318 days, respectively; p = 0.001). MACE occurred in 11.86% and 13.04% of patients in the FG and MG, respectively (p = 0.850). Secondary outcomes, such as death, reinfarction, and the need for new revascularization, showed no significant between-sex differences.

Conclusions

Our study demonstrated the safety of invasive physiological methods to determine coronary revascularization in both male and female patients in a Brazilian population, as evidenced by the low rates of adverse cardiac events and death after a long-term follow-up.

Nonhyperemic Pressure Ratios-All the Same or Nuanced Differences?

Fractional flow reserve (FFR) has become the gold standard for invasively assessing the functional significance of coronary artery disease (CAD) to guide revascularization. The amount of evidence supporting the role of FFR in the cardiac catheterization laboratory is large and still growing. However, FFR uptake in the daily practice is limited by a variety of factors such as invasive instrumentation of the coronary artery that requires extra time and need for vasodilator medications for hyperemia. In this review, we describe the details of wire-based alternatives to FFR, providing insights as to their development, clinical evidence, and limitations.

Is Coronary Physiology Assessment Valid in Special Circumstances?: Aortic Stenosis, Atrial Fibrillation, Left Ventricular Hypertrophy, and Other

Fractional flow reserve (FFR) and nonhyperemic pressure ratios (NHPRs) provide an important clinical tool to evaluate the hemodynamic significance of coronary lesions. However, these indices have major limitations. As these indices are meant to be surrogates of coronary flow, clinical scenarios such as aortic stenosis (with increased end-systolic and end-diastolic pressures) or atrial fibrillation (with significant beat-to-beat cardiac output variability) can have significant effect on the accuracy and reliability of these hemodynamic indices. Here, we provide a comprehensive evaluation of the pitfalls, limitations, and strengths of FFR and NHPRs in common clinical scenarios paired with coronary artery disease.

Physiologic Assessment After Percutaneous Coronary Interventions and Functionally Optimized Revascularization

Coronary physiologic assessment has become a standard of care for patients with coronary atherosclerotic disease. While most attention has focused on pre-interventional physiologic assessment to aid in revascularization decision-making, post-interventional physiologic assessment has not been as widely used, despite evidence supporting its role in assessment and optimization of the revascularization procedure. A thorough understanding of such evidence and ongoing studies would be crucial to incorporate post-interventional physiologic assessment into daily practice. Thus, this review provides a comprehensive overview of current evidence regarding the evolving role of physiologic assessment as a functional optimization tool for the entire revascularization process.

Using Physiology Pullback for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Guidance: Is this the Future?

Modern coronary intervention requires integration of angiographic, physiologic, and intravascular imaging. This article describes the use and techniques needed to understand coronary physiology pullback data and how use it to make revascularization decisions. The article describes instantaneous wave-free ratio, fractional flow reserve, and the data that support their use and how they differ when used in tandem disease. Common practical mistakes and errors are discussed together with a brief review of the limited published research data.

Sensorized Endovascular Technologies: Additional Data to Enhance Decision-Making

BACKGROUND

Current endovascular procedures rely mostly on anatomic information, guided by fluoroscopy, to perform interventions (i.e. angioplasty, stent placement, coils). However, the structural parameters provided by these imaging technologies do not provide any physiological data on either the disease state or efficacy of intervention. Additional endovascular tools are needed to collect physiologic and other both anatomic and nonanatomic data to further individualize endovascular interventions with the ultimate goal of improving patient outcomes. This review details the current state of the art for these sensorized endovascular technologies and details systems under development with the aim of identifying gaps and new directions. The objective of this review was to survey the Vascular Surgery literature, engineering literature, and commercially available products to determine what exists in terms of sensor-enabled endovascular devices and where gaps and opportunities exist for further sensor integration.

METHODS

Search terms were entered into search engines such as Google and Google Scholar to identify endovascular devices containing sensors. A variety of terms were used including directly search for items such as "sensor-enabled endovascular devices" and then also completing more refined searches bases on areas of interest (i.e. fractional flow reserve, navigation, retrograde endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta, etc.). For the most part, systems were included where the sensor was mounted directly onto the catheter and implantable sensors such as those that have been investigated for use with stents have been excluded.

RESULTS

The authors were able to identify a body of literature in the area of endovascular devices that contain sensors to measure physiologic information. However, areas where additional sensing capabilities may be useful were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

Several different types of sensors and sensing systems were identified that have been integrated with endovascular catheters. Although a great deal of work has been done in this field, there are additional useful data that could be obtained from additional novel sensing technologies. Furthermore, significant effort needs to be allocated to carefully studying how these new technologies can be employed to actually improve patient outcomes.

Understanding the Basis for Hyperemic and Nonhyperemic Coronary Pressure Assessment

Despite the now routine integration of invasive physiologic systems into coronary catheter laboratories worldwide, it remains critical that all operators maintain a sound understanding of the fundamental physiologic basis for coronary pressure assessment. More specifically, performing operators should be well informed regarding the basis for hyperemic (ie, fractional flow reserve) and nonhyperemic (ie, instantaneous wave-free ratio and other nonhyperemic pressure ratio) coronary pressure assessment. In this article, we provide readers a comprehensive history charting the inception, development, and validation of hyperemic and nonhyperemic coronary pressure assessment.

Physiology and Intravascular Imaging Coregistration-Best of all Worlds?

Percutaneous coronary intervention is increasingly guided by coronary physiology and optimized using intravascular imaging. Pressure-based measurements determine the significance of a stenosis using hyperemic or nonhyperemic pressure ratios (eg, the instantaneous wave-free ratio). Intravascular ultrasound and optical coherence tomography provide cross-sectional and longitudinal detail regarding plaque composition and vessel characteristics. These facilitate lesion preparation and optimization of stent sizing and positioning. This review explores the evidence-base and practical aspects of coregistering pressure gradient assessment and intravascular imaging with angiography. We then discuss gaps in the evidence and what is needed to help integrate these techniques into clinical practice.

Standardized angiographic projections allow evaluation of coronary artery side branches with quantitative flow ratio (QFR)

Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) is a novel, software-based noninvasive method for the quantitative evaluation of coronary physiology. QFR results correlate with invasive FFR measurements in the three main epicardial coronary arteries. However, QFR data for the evaluation of coronary side branches (SB) are scarce. The evaluation of QFR-performance of SB was retrospective and prospective. Eighty-seven patients with suspected chronic coronary syndrome, who received angiography using routine core lab projections, were retrospectively analyzed. On the second part 37 patients, who received angiography using recommended standardized coronary angiography projections, were prospectively analyzed. Quantitative analysis was performed for SB with a maximum lumen diameter proximal of ≥2 mm based on quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) by two certified experts with the software QAngio XA 3D 3.2. Using routine projections, QFR computation in 55 % of the SB were obtained (123 out of 224). Using standardized projections, 85 % of SB were computed by QFR (64 out of 75; p < 0.001 vs routine projections). The fluoroscopy time for recommended projections was not significantly different as opposed to routine projections (3.75 ± 2.2 vs. 4.58 ± 3.00 min, p = 2.6986). Using the standardized projections was associated with a higher amount of contrast medium (53.44 ± 24.23 vs. 87.95 ± 43.73 ml, p < 0.01), longer overall procedure time (23.23 ± 16.35 vs. 36.14 ± 17.21 min, p < 0.01) and a higher dose area product (1152.28 ± 576.70 vs. 2540.68 ± 1774.07 cGycm2, p < 0.01). Our study shows that the blood flow of the vast majority of coronary SB can be determined non-invasively by QFR in addition to the main epicardial coronary arteries when standardized projections are used.