Systematic coronary physiology improves level of agreement in diagnostic coronary angiography.

OBJECTIVE: The training of interventional cardiologists (ICs), non-interventional cardiologists (NICs) and cardiac surgeons (CSs) differs, and this may be reflected in their interpretation of invasive coronary angiography (ICA) and management plan. Availability of systematic coronary physiology might result in more homogeneous interpretation and management strategy compared with ICA alone. METHODS: 150 coronary angiograms from patients with stable chest pain were presented independently to three NICs, three ICs and three CSs. By consensus, each group graded (1) coronary disease severity and (2) management plan, using options: (a) optimal medical therapy alone, (b) percutaneous coronary intervention, (c) coronary artery bypass graft or (d) more investigation required. Each group was then provided with fractional flow reserve (FFR) from all major vessels and asked to repeat the analysis. RESULTS: There was only 'fair' level of agreement of management plan among ICs, NICs and CSs (kappa 0.351, 95% CI 0.295-0.408, p<0.001) based on ICA alone (complete agreement in 35% of cases), which almost doubled to 'good' level (kappa 0.635, 95% CI 0.572-0.697, p<0.001) when comprehensive FFR was available (complete agreement in 66% of cases). Overall, the consensus management plan changed in 36.7%, 52% and 37.3% of cases for ICs, NICs and CSs, respectively, when FFR data were available. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with ICA alone, the availability of systematic FFR of all major coronary arteries produced a significantly more concordant interpretation and more homogeneous management plan among IC, NIC and CS specialists. Comprehensive physiological assessment may be of value in routine care for Heart Team decision-making. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01070771.

Ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid plus citrate-theophylline-adenosine-dipyridamole (EDTA-CTAD): a novel anticoagulant for the flow cytometric assessment of platelet and neutrophil activation ex vivo in whole blood.

Ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) is the anticoagulant recommended for full blood counts, citrate is recommended for coagulation and platelet studies, and citrate-theophylline-adenosine-dipyridamole (CTAD) inhibits platelet activation. Because the combination of EDTA and CTAD (E/C) is better than EDTA or CTAD alone for measuring platelet parameters on the ADVIA 120 Haematology System, we investigated whether it also offers advantages for the flow cytometric assessment of platelet and/or neutrophil activation and platelet-leucocyte aggregate formation ex vivo. Blood from healthy subjects was collected into E/C or citrate, kept at room temperature or at 4 degrees C, and analysed 0 to 360 min later in the ADVIA 120 and by immunofluorescent flow cytometry. Platelet count, mean platelet volume, number of platelet clumps, mean platelet component, numbers of CD62P(+) platelets and platelet-leucocyte aggregates, and expression of CD11b on neutrophils changed little over 360 min in blood with E/C kept at 4 degrees C. In contrast, one or more parameter changed when blood was kept with E/C at ambient temperature or with citrate at either temperature. The use of E/C in in vitro and in vivo studies is illustrated. Platelet and neutrophil activation status ex vivo can be reliably assessed if blood is collected into E/C, held at 4 degrees C, and analysed within 6 h.

Does routine pressure wire assessment influence management strategy at coronary angiography for diagnosis of chest pain?: the RIPCORD study.

BACKGROUND: The use of coronary angiography (CA) for diagnosis and management of chest pain (CP) has several flaws. The assessment of coronary artery disease using fractional flow reserve (FFR) is a well-validated technique for describing lesion-level ischemia and improves clinical outcome in the context of percutaneous coronary intervention. The impact of routine FFR at the time of diagnostic CA on patient management has not been determined. METHODS AND RESULTS: Two hundred patients with stable CP underwent CA for clinical indications. The supervising cardiologist (S.C.) made a management plan based on CA (optimal medical therapy alone, percutaneous coronary intervention, coronary artery bypass grafting, or more information required) and also recorded which stenoses were significant. An interventional cardiologist then measured FFR in all patent coronary arteries of stentable diameter (≥2.25 mm). S.C. was then asked to make a second management plan when FFR results were disclosed. Overall, after disclosure of FFR data, management plan based on CA alone was changed in 26% of patients, and the number and localization of functional stenoses changed in 32%. Specifically, of 72 cases in which optimal medical therapy was recommended after CA, 9 (13%) were actually referred for revascularization with FFR data. By contrast, of 89 cases in whom management plan was optimal medical therapy based on FFR, revascularization would have been recommended in 25 (28%) based on CA. CONCLUSIONS: Routine measurement of FFR at CA has important influence both on which coronary arteries have significant stenoses and on patient management. These findings could have important implications for clinical practice. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL: http://www.clinicaltrial.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01070771.