Prognostic impact of quantitative flow ratio (QFR)-consistent complete revascularization in patients with myocardial infarction and multivessel coronary artery disease.

BACKGROUND: Complete revascularization is associated with improved outcomes in patients with myocardial infarction and multivessel coronary artery disease. Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) represents an emerging angiography-based tool for functional lesion assessment. The present study investigated the prognostic impact of QFR-consistent complete revascularization in patients with myocardial infarction and multivessel disease. METHODS: A total of 792 patients with myocardial infarction and multivessel disease were enrolled in the analysis. Post-hoc QFR analyses of 1,320 nonculprit vessels were performed by investigators blinded to clinical outcomes. The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause death, nonculprit vessel related nonfatal myocardial infarction, and ischemia-driven revascularization at 2 years after index myocardial infarction. Patients were stratified into a QFR-consistent PCI group (n = 646) and a QFR-inconsistent PCI group (n = 146), based on whether the intervention was congruent with the QFR-determined functional significance of the nonculprit lesions. RESULTS: The primary endpoint occurred in a total of 22 patients (3.4%) in the QFR-consistent PCI group and in 27 patients (18.5%) in the QFR-inconsistent group (HR 0.17, 95% CI 0.10-0.30, P < .001).The difference in the primary endpoint was driven by reduced rates of nonfatal myocardial infarction (2.0% vs. 15.1%; HR 0.13, 95% CI 0.06-0.25; P < .001) and ischemia-driven revascularization (1.2% vs. 5.5%; HR 0.21, 95% CI 0.08-0.57; P = .001) in the QFR-consistent PCI group. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with myocardial infarction and multivessel disease, a QFR-consistent complete revascularization was associated with a reduced risk of all-cause mortality, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and ischemia-driven revascularization. These findings underline the value of angiography-based functional lesion assessment for personalized revascularization strategies.

Prognostic impact of fractional flow reserve measurements in patients with acute coronary syndromes: a subanalysis of the FLORIDA study.

Randomized trials suggest benefits for fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guided vs. angiography-guided treatment strategies in well-defined and selected patient cohorts with acute coronary syndromes (ACS). The long-term prognostic value of FFR measurement in unselected all-comer ACS patients, however, remains unknown. This subanalysis of the Fractional FLOw Reserve In cardiovascular DiseAses (FLORIDA) study sought to investigate the long-term effects of FFR in the management of lesions in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). FLORIDA was an observational all-comer cohort study performed in Germany, that was population-based and unselected. Patients enrolled into the anonymized InGef Research Database presenting with ACS and undergoing coronary angiography between January 2014 and December 2015 were included in the analysis. Patients were stratified into either the FFR-guided or the angiography-guided treatment arm, based on the treatment received. A matched cohort study design was used. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality. The secondary endpoint was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), a composite of death, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), and repeat revascularization. Follow-up time was 3 years. Rates of 3-year mortality were 10.2 and 14.0% in the FFR-guided and the angiography-guided treatment arms (p = 0.04), corresponding to a 27% relative risk reduction for FFR in ACS patients. Rates of MACE were similar in both arms (47.7 vs. 51.5%, p = 0.14), including similar rates of non-fatal MI (27.7 vs. 25.4%, p = 0.47) and revascularization (9.9 vs. 12.1%, p = 0.17). In this large, all-comer observational study of ACS patients, FFR-guided revascularization was associated with a lower mortality at 3 years. This finding encourages the routine use of FFR to guide lesion revascularization in patients presenting with ACS.

Impact of elevated lipoprotein(a) on coronary artery disease phenotype and severity.

AIMS: A thorough characterization of the relationship between elevated lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] and coronary artery disease (CAD) is lacking. This study aimed to quantitatively assess the association of increasing Lp(a) levels and CAD severity in a real-world population. METHODS AND RESULTS: This non-interventional, cross-sectional, LipidCardio study included patients aged ≥21 years undergoing angiography (October 2016-March 2018) at a tertiary cardiology centre, who have at least one Lp(a) measurement. The association between Lp(a) and CAD severity was determined by synergy between PCI with taxus and cardiac surgery (SYNTAX)-I and Gensini scores and angiographic characteristics. Overall, 975 patients (mean age: 69.5 years) were included; 70.1% were male, 97.5% had Caucasian ancestry, and 33.2% had a family history of premature atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Median baseline Lp(a) level was 19.3 nmol/L. Patients were stratified by baseline Lp(a): 72.9% had < 65 nmol/L, 21.0% had ≥100 nmol/L, 17.2% had ≥125 nmol/L, and 12.9% had ≥150 nmol/L. Compared with the normal (Lp(a) < 65 nmol/L) group, elevated Lp(a) groups (e.g. ≥ 150 nmol/L) had a higher proportion of patients with prior CAD (48.4% vs. 62.7%; P < 0.01), prior coronary revascularization (39.1% vs. 51.6%; P = 0.01), prior coronary artery bypass graft (6.0% vs. 15.1%; P < 0.01), vessel(s) with lesions (68.5% vs. 81.3%; P = 0.03), diffusely narrowed vessels (10.9% vs. 16.5%; P = 0.01) or chronic total occlusion lesions (14.3% vs. 25.2%; P < 0.01), and higher median SYNTAX-I (3.0 vs. 5.5; P = 0.01) and Gensini (10.0 vs. 16.0; P < 0.01) scores. CONCLUSION: Elevated Lp(a) was associated with a more severe presentation of CAD. Awareness of Lp(a) levels in patients with CAD may have implications in their clinical management.

Patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) suffer with progressive plaque buildup in the walls of coronary blood vessels, which restricts blood flow and may result in serious cardiovascular outcomes such as chest pain (angina) and heart attacks (myocardial infarction). In this study, we assessed whether elevated levels of lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)­a lipoprotein found in blood] are associated with more severe illness. We observed that elevated Lp(a) was associated with a higher proportion of patients with prior CAD, prior interventions on coronary blood vessels, and more diseased blood vessels. These collectively form what is considered a 'severe' clinical presentation of CAD, meaning a greater likelihood of adverse clinical outcomes.

Fractional flow reserve measurements and long-term mortality-results from the FLORIDA study.

Background: Randomized evidence suggested improved outcomes in fractional flow reserve (FFR) guidance of coronary revascularization compared to medical therapy in well-defined patient cohorts. However, the impact of FFR-guided revascularization on long-term outcomes of unselected patients with chronic or acute coronary syndromes (ACS) is unknown. Aims: The FLORIDA (Fractional FLOw Reserve In cardiovascular DiseAses) study sought to investigate outcomes of FFR-guided vs. angiography-guided treatment strategies in a large, real-world cohort. Methods: This study included patients enrolled into the German InGef Research Database. Patients undergoing coronary angiography between January 2014 and December 2015 were included in the analysis. Eligible patients had at least one inpatient coronary angiogram for suspected coronary artery disease between January 2014 and December 2015. Patients were stratified into FFR arm if a coronary angiography with adjunctive FFR measurement was performed, otherwise into the angiography-only arm. Matching was applied to ensure a balanced distribution of baseline characteristics in the study cohort. Patients were followed for 3 years after index date and primary endpoint was all-cause mortality. Results: In the matched population, mortality at 3 years was 9.6% in the FFR-assessed group and 12.6% in the angiography-only group (p = 0.002), corresponding to a 24% relative risk reduction with use of FFR. This effect was most pronounced in patients in whom revascularization was deferred based on FFR (8.7% vs. 12.3%, p = 0.04) and in high-risk subgroups including patients aged ≥75 years (14.9% vs. 20.1%, p < 0.01) and those presenting with ACS (10.2% vs. 14.0%, p = 0.04). Conclusions: FFR-based revascularization strategy was associated with reduced mortality at 3 years. These findings further support the use of FFR in everyday clinical practice.

Feasibility and diagnostic reliability of quantitative flow ratio in the assessment of non-culprit lesions in acute coronary syndrome.

Several studies have demonstrated the feasibility and safety of hemodynamic assessment of non-culprit coronary arteries in setting of acute coronary syndromes (ACS) using fractional flow reserve (FFR) measurements. Quantitative flow ratio (QFR), recently introduced as angiography-based fast FFR computation, has been validated with good agreement and diagnostic performance with FFR in chronic coronary syndromes. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility and diagnostic reliability of QFR assessment during primary PCI. A total of 321 patients with ACS and multivessel disease, who underwent primary PCI and were planned for staged PCI of at least one non-culprit lesion were enrolled in the analysis. Within this patient cohort, serial post-hoc QFR analyses of 513 non-culprit vessels were performed. The median time interval between primary and staged PCI was 49 [42-58] days. QFR in non-culprit coronary arteries did not change between acute and staged measurements (0.86 vs 0.87, p = 0.114), with strong correlation (r = 0.94, p ≤ 0.001) and good agreement (mean difference -0.008, 95%CI -0.013-0.003) between measurements. Importantly, QFR as assessed at index procedure had sensitivity of 95.02%, specificity of 93.59% and diagnostic accuracy of 94.15% in prediction of QFR ≤ 0.80 at the time of staged PCI. The present study for the first time confirmed the feasibility and diagnostic accuracy of non-culprit coronary artery QFR during index procedure for ACS. These results support QFR as valuable tool in patients with ACS to detect further hemodynamic relevant lesions with excellent diagnostic performance and therefore to guide further revascularisation therapy.

Prognostic Impact of Pancoronary Quantitative Flow Ratio Assessment in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Acute Coronary Syndromes.

BACKGROUND: Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) has been introduced as a novel angiography-based modality for fast hemodynamic assessment of coronary artery lesions and validated against fractional flow reserve. This study sought to define the prognostic role of pancoronary QFR assessment in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) including postinterventional culprit and nonculprit vessels. METHODS: In a total of 792 patients with ACS (48.6% ST-segment-elevation ACS and 51.4% non-ST-segment-elevation ACS), QFR analyses of postinterventional culprit (n=792 vessels) and nonculprit vessels (n=1231 vessels) were post hoc performed by investigators blinded to clinical outcomes. The follow-up comprised of major adverse cardiovascular events, including all-cause mortality, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and ischemia-driven coronary revascularization within 2 years after the index ACS event. RESULTS: Major adverse cardiovascular events as composite end point occurred in 99 patients (12.5%). QFR with an optimal cutoff value of 0.89 for postinterventional culprit vessels and 0.85 for nonculprit vessels emerged as independent predictor of major adverse cardiovascular events after ACS (nonculprit arteries: adjusted odds ratio, 3.78 [95% CI, 2.21-6.45], P<0.001 and postpercutaneous coronary intervention culprit arteries: adjusted odds ratio, 3.60 [95% CI, 2.09-6.20], P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The present study for the first time demonstrates the prognostic implications of a pancoronary angiography-based functional lesion assessment in patients with ACS. Hence, QFR offers a novel tool to advance risk stratification and guide therapeutic management after ACS.