Coronary pressure and FFR predict long-term outcome after PTCA

How much flow is enough: the use of fractional flow reserve in chronic limb-threatening ischemia in a series of patients with isolated occlusive tibial disease

The role of the fractional flow reserve to guide lower extremity peripheral vascular intervention, specifically in chronic limb-threatening ischemia, has remained unclear. This series presents a novel use of the fractional flow reserve in four patients to guide lower extremity endovascular interventions in patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia.

The Use of Fractional Flow Reserve for Physiological Assessment of Indeterminate Lesions in Peripheral Artery Disease

Peripheral artery disease (PAD) is a prevalent disorder in the United States, associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Fractional Flow Reserve (FFR) is a physiological test used to assess the hemodynamic significance of intermediate lesions on conventional angiography. It is well studied in coronary artery disease and is as an important tool to guide decisions regarding revascularization in a significant percentage of patients with intermediate lesions. As compared to coronary FFR, the use of FFR in peripheral artery disease (PFFR) is much less prevalent. Overall data regarding the use of the PFFR is sparse. There are limited studies that have shown the correlation of PFFR with non-invasive testing including ankle-brachial index (ABI) and Doppler Imaging. Unlike coronary FFR, the optimal pharmaceutical agents and doses to induce maximal hyperemia in the peripheral vascular bed are also not well established. Moreover, there are no established standardized procedural protocols for measuring PFFR. Various studies have employed varying techniques, hyperemic agents and doses. The aim of this literature review is to summarize the current evidence on PFFR, the correlation with noninvasive studies used in PAD and to increase awareness of the potential role of the PFFR in peripheral interventions.

Change in coronary blood flow after percutaneous coronary intervention in relation to baseline lesion physiology: results of the JUSTIFY-PCI study

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) aims to increase coronary blood flow by relieving epicardial obstruction. However, no study has objectively confirmed this and assessed changes in flow over different phases of the cardiac cycle. We quantified the change in resting and hyperemic flow velocity after PCI in stenoses defined physiologically by fractional flow reserve and other parameters.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Seventy-five stenoses (67 patients) underwent paired flow velocity assessment before and after PCI. Flow velocity was measured over the whole cardiac cycle and the wave-free period. Mean fractional flow reserve was 0.68±0.02. Pre-PCI, hyperemic flow velocity is diminished in stenoses classed as physiologically significant compared with those classed nonsignificant (P<0.001). In significant stenoses, flow velocity over the resting wave-free period and hyperemic flow velocity did not differ statistically. After PCI, resting flow velocity over the wave-free period increased little (5.6±1.6 cm/s) and significantly less than hyperemic flow velocity (21.2±3 cm/s; P<0.01). The greatest increase in hyperemic flow velocity was observed when treating stenoses below physiological cut points; treating stenoses with fractional flow reserve ≤0.80 gained Δ28.5±3.8 cm/s, whereas those fractional flow reserve >0.80 had a significantly smaller gain (Δ4.6±2.3 cm/s; P<0.001). The change in pressure-only physiological indices demonstrated a curvilinear relationship to the change in hyperemic flow velocity but was flat for resting flow velocity.

CONCLUSIONS

Pre-PCI physiology is strongly associated with post-PCI increase in hyperemic coronary flow velocity. Hyperemic flow velocity increases 6-fold more when stenoses classed as physiologically significant undergo PCI than when nonsignificant stenoses are treated. Resting flow velocity measured over the wave-free period changes at least 4-fold less than hyperemic flow velocity after PCI.

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.

Three dimensional quantitative coronary angiography can detect reliably ischemic coronary lesions based on fractional flow reserve

Conventional coronary angiography (CAG) has limitations in evaluating lesions producing ischemia. Three dimensional quantitative coronary angiography (3D-QCA) shows reconstructed images of CAG using computer based algorithm, the Cardio-op B system (Paieon Medical, Rosh Ha'ayin, Israel). The aim of this study was to evaluate whether 3D-QCA can reliably predict ischemia assessed by myocardial fractional flow reserve (FFR) < 0.80. 3D-QCA images were reconstructed from CAG which also were evaluated with FFR to assess ischemia. Minimal luminal diameter (MLD), percent diameter stenosis (%DS), minimal luminal area (MLA), and percent area stenosis (%AS) were obtained. The results of 3D-QCA and FFR were compared. A total of 266 patients was enrolled for the present study. FFR for all lesions ranged from 0.57 to 1.00 (0.85 ± 0.09). Measurement of MLD, %DS, MLA, and %AS all were significantly correlated with FFR (r = 0.569, 0609, 0.569, 0.670, respectively, all P < 0.001). In lesions with MLA < 4.0 mm(2), %AS of more than 65.5% had a 80% sensitivity and a 83% specificity to predict FFR < 0.80 (area under curve, AUC was 0.878). 3D-QCA can reliably predict coronary lesions producing ischemia and may be used to guide therapeutic approach for coronary artery disease.

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.

Anatomical and physiologic assessments in patients with small coronary artery disease: final results of the Physiologic and Anatomical Evaluation Prior to and After Stent Implantation in Small Coronary Vessels (PHANTOM) trial

BACKGROUND

Patients with small coronary arteries are at high risk for complications after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The objective of our study was to investigate the correlation between angiography, intravascular ultrasound (IVUS), and fractional flow reserve (FFR) in patients with moderate stenoses in small (<2.8 mm) coronary arteries.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Sixty consecutive patients, of 800 scheduled for PCI during the study period, were prospectively enrolled in the study. The FFR was measured after a 2-minute infusion of adenosine. For the preprocedural assessments, 60 patients underwent an FFR measurement, 56 underwent an IVUS, and 60 underwent an angiography; for the postprocedural assessments, 22 patients underwent an FFR measurement, 18 underwent an IVUS, and 22 underwent an angiography. The jeopardy score for the target vessel was calculated. Data were analyzed by an independent core laboratory. Patients with an FFR >0.75 were deferred from PCI. Patients were stratified in 2 groups according to their FFR values (< or =0.75 vs >0.75) and were followed for 1 year. Significant (FFR < or =0.75) coronary stenosis was observed in only 35% of the patients. The mean preprocedural FFR values were 0.79 +/- 0.13 for the overall population, 0.64 +/- 0.08 for the patients with an FFR < or =0.75, and 0.87 +/- 0.06 for the patients with an FFR >0.75. There was no correlation between angiography, IVUS, and FFR. The jeopardy score was inversely correlated with FFR (R = -0.32). Only a third of the patients with optimal stenting defined by IVUS achieved an FFR >0.90. After 1 year, 24% of the patients with an FFR < or =0.75 required a repeat PCI. There was no occurrence of myocardial infarction or death, and only 2.6% of the patients deferred from PCI required revascularization.

CONCLUSION

Anatomical parameters are limited in determining the hemodynamic significance of small coronary disease. Most moderate stenoses in small coronaries could be safely deferred from PCI based on FFR.

How to prevent unnecessary coronary interventions: identifying lesions responsible for ischemia in the cath lab

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Coronary angiography is limited by the inability to identify intermediate coronary lesions responsible for ischemia. In the catheterization laboratory three techniques can be used for the evaluation of the physiologic significance of intermediate or borderline significant coronary stenoses: (1) pressure wire-derived coronary fractional flow reserve (FFR), (2) Doppler wire-derived measurement of coronary flow reserve (CFR), and (3) intravascular ultrasound (IVUS).

RECENT FINDINGS

All of these techniques have been validated for assessing the functional significance of intermediate stenoses, but also have inherent limitations.

SUMMARY

Overall, measurement of FFR appears to be the best method for interrogating intermediate coronary lesions. This review discusses the strengths and limitations of each of these techniques.