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.

Comparison of Two Contemporary Quantitative Atherosclerotic Plaque Assessment Tools for Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography: Single-Center Analysis and Multi-Center Patient Cohort Validation.

BACKGROUND: Coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) provides non-invasive quantitative assessments of plaque burden and composition. The quantitative assessment of plaque components requires the use of analysis software that provides reproducible semi-automated plaque detection and analysis. However, commercially available plaque analysis software can vary widely in the degree of automation, resulting in differences in terms of reproducibility and time spent. AIM: To compare the reproducibility and time spent of two CCTA analysis software tools using different algorithms for the quantitative assessment of coronary plaque volumes and composition in two independent patient cohorts. METHODS: The study population included 100 patients from two different cohorts: 50 patients from a single-center (Siemens Healthineers, SOMATOM Force (DSCT)) and another 50 patients from a multi-center study (5 different > 64 slice CT scanner types). Quantitative measurements of total calcified and non-calcified plaque volume of the right coronary artery (RCA), left anterior descending (LAD), and left circumflex coronary artery (LCX) were performed on a total of 300 coronaries by two independent readers, using two different CCTA analysis software tools (Tool #1: Siemens Healthineers, syngo.via Frontier CT Coronary Plaque Analysis and Tool #2: Siemens Healthineers, successor CT Coronary Plaque Analysis prototype). In addition, the total time spent for the analysis was recorded with both programs. RESULTS: The patients in cohorts 1 and 2 were 62.8 ± 10.2 and 70.9 ± 11.7 years old, respectively, 10 (20.0%) and 35 (70.0%) were female and 34 (68.0%) and 20 (40.0%), respectively, had hyperlipidemia. In Cohort #1, the inter- and intra-observer variabilities for the assessment of plaque volumes per patient for Tool #1 versus Tool #2 were 22.8%, 22.0%, and 26.0% versus 2.3%, 3.9%, and 2.5% and 19.7%, 21.4%, and 22.1% versus 0.2%, 0.1%, and 0.3%, respectively, for total, noncalcified, and calcified lesions (p < 0.001 for all between Tools #1 and 2 both for inter- and intra-observer). The inter- and intra-observer variabilities using Tool #2 remained low at 2.9%, 2.7%, and 3.0% and 3.8%, 3.7%, and 4.0%, respectively, for total, non-calcified, and calcified lesions in Cohort #2. For each dataset, the median processing time was higher for Tool #1 versus Tool #2 (459.5 s IQR = 348.0-627.0 versus 208.5 s; IQR = 198.0-216.0) (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The plaque analysis Tool #2 (CT-guided PCI) encompassing a higher degree of automated support required less manual editing, was more time-efficient, and showed a higher intra- and inter-observer reproducibility for the quantitative assessment of plaque volumes both in a representative single-center and in a multi-center validation cohort.

Effects of high- versus low-intensity lipid-lowering treatment in patients undergoing serial coronary computed tomography angiography: results of the multi-center LOCATE study.

AIM: To evaluate the effects of lipid-lowering medications of different intensities on total, calcified, and non-calcified plaque volumes in patients undergoing serial cardiac computed tomography angiography (CCTA). METHODS: Individuals with chronic coronary syndromes from 11 centers were included in a retrospective registry. Total, calcified, and non-calcified plaque volumes were quantified and the relative difference in plaque volumes between baseline and follow-up CCTA was calculated. The intensity of lipid-lowering treatment was designated as low, moderate, or high, based on current recommendations. RESULTS: Of 216 patients (mean age 63.1 ± 9.7 years), undergoing serial CCTA (median timespan = 824.5 [IQR = 463.0-1323.0] days), 89 (41.2%) received no or low-intensity lipid-lowering medications, and 80 (37.0%) and 47 (21.8%) moderate- and high-intensity lipid-lowering agents, respectively. Progression of total and non-calcified plaque was attenuated in patients on moderate-/high- versus those on no/low-intensity treatment and arrested in patients treated with high-intensity statins or PCSK9 inhibitors (p < 0.001). Halted increase of non-calcified plaque was associated with LDL-cholesterol reduction (p < 0.001), whereas calcified plaque mass and Agatston score increased irrespective of the lipid-lowering treatment (p = NS). The intensity of lipid-lowering therapy robustly predicted attenuation of non-calcified plaque progression as a function of the time duration between the two CCTA scans, and this was independent of age and cardiovascular risk factors (HR = 3.83, 95% CI = 1.81-8.05, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The LOCATE multi-center observational study shows that progression of non-calcified plaques, which have been previously described as precursors of acute coronary syndromes, can be attenuated with moderate-intensity, and arrested with high-intensity lipid-lowering therapy. GERMAN CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTER: DRKS00031954.

Ultrasound imaging and shear wave elastography for the differential diagnosis of heel pain: a comparative cross-sectional study.

PURPOSE: In correlation with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), this study attempts to assess the effectiveness of the diagnostic of ultrasonography (US) features and shear wave elastography (SWE) in determining the different causes of heel pain. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 55 heels with a mean age of 38.33 ± 10.8 were included in the study (10 control cases and 41 cases, 4 of which had bilateral heel pain). There were 23 female cases (56.1%) and 18 male cases (43.95%). Examinations using shear wave elastography (SWE) and ultrasound (US) were done in different positions. MRI and the obtained data were correlated. RESULTS: When used to diagnose different heel pain causes, ultrasound demonstrated great sensitivity and specificity. SWE demonstrated a good correlation with MRI findings and enhanced the ultrasound's diagnostic precision in identifying plantar fasciitis early on (increased accuracy from 88.9 to 93.33% with 100% sensitivity and 83.3% specificity) and Achilles tendinopathy (increased accuracy from 88.9 to 97.8 with 94.7% sensitivity and 100% specificity). CONCLUSION: In summary, we concluded that heel pain can be efficiently examined by both ultrasound (US) and shear wave elastography (SWE) with the former being used as the primary effective tool and the latter being done to increase diagnostic accuracy. We also concluded that SWE improved the ultrasound's diagnostic precision in identifying patients with early plantar fasciitis and Achilles tendinopathy and showed a robust relationship with clinical outcomes, enhancing patient evaluation and follow-up.