Radial Artery Calcification in Predicting Coronary Calcification and Atherosclerosis Burden.

Background: Atherosclerosis is a systemic arterial disease with heterogeneous involvement in all vascular beds; however, studies examining the relationship between coronary and radial artery calcification are lacking. The purpose of this study was to assess the relationship between the two sites and the prognostic value of radial artery calcification (RC) for coronary artery disease. Methods: This is a single-center, retrospective cross-sectional study based on Doppler ultrasound of radial artery (RUS) and coronary artery angiography (CAG). We included a total of 202 patients undergoing RUS during distal radial access and CAG at the same procedure, between December 2020 and May 2021, from which 103 were found having RC during RUS (RC group) and 99 without (NRC group). Coronary calcifications were evaluated either by angiography examination (moderate and severe), positive CT (>100 Agatson units), or intracoronary imaging (IVUS, OCT). Results: A significant correlation was observed between radial calcification and coronary calcification variables (67.3% vs. 32.7%, p=0.001). The correlation between risk factors such as age, smoking, chronic kidney disease, and diabetes mellitus was higher while sex did not play a role. The need of PCI and/or CABG was higher in the RC group (60% vs. 44%, p=0.02). RC, therefore, predicts the extent and severity of coronary artery disease. Conclusion: RC may be frequently associated with calcific coronary plaques. These findings highlight the potential beneficial examination of radial arteries whenever CAD is suspected.

A case report of recurrent acute myocardial infarction and cardiac arrest due to aortic dissection secondary to IgG4-related aortitis.

Occlusion of the right coronary artery is a relatively rare complication of type A aortic dissection and an example of type 2 myocardial infarction (MI) as well but when it occurs, it may have a fatal result for the patient. Aortic pseudoaneurysms are local type A dissections with a restricted extent in which the majority of the aortic wall has been breached and luminal blood is held in only by a thin rim of the remaining wall, mainly purely the adventitia. They typically occur from iatrogenic trauma by interventional procedures or previous cardiac surgery. We present a case of a 56 years old patient who suffered an acute functional MI due to such pseudoaneurysm formed in the context of an undiagnosed aortitis. The etiology remained unclear until the surgical aortic prosthesis was deemed necessary, finding chronic IgG4 infiltrates in the aortic tissue. To our knowledge, this is the first case of IgG4-related aortitis causing functional MI and cardiogenic shock.

Changes in surgical revascularization strategy after fractional flow reserve.

AIMS: In the randomized GRAFFITI trial, surgeons drew their strategy based on coronary angiography. When patients were randomized to fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guidance, surgeons were informed of the FFR values and asked to redraw their strategy. The aim of this study was to investigate the changes induced by FFR knowledge. METHODS AND RESULTS: The intended and performed strategy (before and after FFR) were compared. Among 172 patients, 84 with 300 lesions were randomized to the FFR-guided group. The intended strategy was to bypass 236 stenoses:108 with a venous and 128 with an arterial graft. After disclosing FFR, a change in strategy occurred in 64 lesions (21.3%) of 48 (55%) patients. Among 64 lesions for which the intended strategy was medical therapy, 16 (25%) were bypassed after disclosing FFR. The number of procedures with >1 venous graft planned was significantly reduced from 37 to 27 patients (p = .031). The proportion of on-pump surgery was significantly reduced from 71 to 61 patients (p = .006). The rates of clinical events at 1 year were similar between patients with or without at least one change in strategy. DISCUSSION: FFR-guided CABG is associated with a simplified surgical procedure in 55% of the patients, with similar clinical outcomes.

Supplemental Fibrinogen Restores Platelet Inhibitor-Induced Reduction in Thrombus Formation without Altering Platelet Function: An In Vitro Study.

BACKGROUND: For patients treated with dual antiplatelet therapy, standardized drug-specific 3-to-7 day cessation is recommended prior to major surgery to reach sufficient platelet function recovery. Here we investigated the hypothesis that supplemental fibrinogen might mitigate the inhibitory effects of antiplatelet therapy. METHODS AND RESULTS: To this end blood from healthy donors was treated in vitro with platelet inhibitors, and in vitro thrombus formation and platelet activation were assessed. Ticagrelor, acetylsalicylic acid, the combination of both, and tirofiban all markedly attenuated the formation of adherent thrombi, when whole blood was perfused through collagen-coated microchannels at physiological shear rates. Addition of fibrinogen restored in vitro thrombus formation in the presence of antiplatelet drugs and heparin. However, platelet activation, as investigated in assays of P-selectin expression and calcium flux, was not altered by fibrinogen supplementation. Most importantly, fibrinogen was able to restore in vitro thrombogenesis in patients on maintenance dual antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention. CONCLUSION: Thus, our in vitro data support the notion that supplementation of fibrinogen influences the perioperative hemostasis in patients undergoing surgery during antiplatelet therapy by promoting thrombogenesis without significantly interfering with platelet activation.

Procedural microvascular activation in long lesions treated with bioresorbable vascular scaffolds or everolimus-eluting stents: the PROACTIVE trial.

AIMS: Significant platelet activation after long stented coronary segments has been associated with periprocedural microvascular impairment and myonecrosis. In long lesions treated either with an everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) or an everolimus-eluting stent (EES), we aimed to investigate (a) procedure-related microvascular impairment, and (b) the relationship of platelet activation with microvascular function and related myonecrosis. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients (n=66) undergoing elective percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in long lesions were randomised 1:1 to either BVS or EES. The primary endpoint was the difference between groups in changes of pressure-derived corrected index of microvascular resistance (cIMR) after PCI. Periprocedural myonecrosis was assessed by high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT), platelet reactivity by high-sensitivity adenosine diphosphate (hs-ADP)-induced platelet reactivity with the Multiplate Analyzer. Post-dilatation was more frequent in the BVS group, with consequent longer procedure time. A significant difference was observed between the two groups in the primary endpoint of ΔcIMR (p=0.04). hs-ADP was not different between the groups at different time points. hs-cTnT significantly increased after PCI, without difference between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: In long lesions, BVS implantation is associated with significant acute reduction in IMR as compared with EES, with no significant interaction with platelet reactivity or periprocedural myonecrosis.

Graft patency after FFR-guided versus angiography-guided coronary artery bypass grafting: the GRAFFITI trial.

AIMS: The aim of this study was to assess prospectively the clinical benefits of fractional flow reserve (FFR) in guiding coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). METHODS AND RESULTS: GRAFFITI is a single-blinded, prospective, multicentre, randomised controlled trial of FFR-guided versus angiography-guided CABG. We enrolled patients undergoing coronary angiography, having a significantly diseased left anterior descending artery or left main stem and at least one more major coronary artery with intermediate stenosis, assessed by FFR. Surgical strategy was defined based on angiography, blinded to FFR values prior to randomisation. After randomisation, patients were operated on either following the angiography-based strategy (angiography-guided group) or according to FFR, i.e., with an FFR ≤0.80 as cut-off for grafting (FFR-guided group). The primary endpoint was graft patency at 12 months. Between March 2012 and December 2016, 172 patients were randomised either to the angiography-guided group (84 patients) or to the FFR-guided group (88 patients). The patients had a median of three [3; 4] lesions; diameter stenosis was 65% (50%; 80%), FFR was 0.72 (0.50; 0.82). Compared to the angiography-guided group, the FFR-guided group received fewer anastomoses (3 [3; 3] vs 2 [2; 3], respectively; p=0.004). One-year angiographic follow-up showed no difference in overall graft patency (126 [80%] vs 113 [81%], respectively; p=0.885). One-year clinical follow-up, available in 98% of patients, showed no difference in the composite of death, myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularisation and stroke. CONCLUSIONS: FFR guidance of CABG has no impact on one-year graft patency, but it is associated with a simplified surgical procedure. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01810224.

Study Design of the Graft Patency After FFR-Guided Versus Angiography-Guided CABG Trial (GRAFFITI).

Clinical benefit of invasive functionally guided revascularization has been mostly investigated and proven for percutaneous coronary intervention. It has never been prospectively evaluated whether a systematic fractional flow reserve (FFR) assessment is also beneficial in guiding coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG). The objective of the GRAft patency after FFR-guided versus angiography-guIded CABG (GRAFFITI) trial was to compare an FFR-guided revascularization strategy to the traditional angiography-guided revascularization strategy for patients undergoing CABG. Patients were enrolled with significantly diseased left anterior descending or left main stem and at least one major coronary artery with angiographically intermediate stenosis (30-90% diameter stenosis) that was assessed by FFR. Thereafter, while the FFR values were kept concealed, cardiac surgeons decided their intended procedural strategy based on the coronary angiography alone. At this point, patients underwent 1:1 randomization to either an FFR-guided or an angiography-guided CABG strategy. In case the patient was randomized to angiography-guided arm, cardiac surgeons kept their intended procedural strategy, i.e., CABG was guided solely on the basis of the coronary angiography. In case the patient was randomized to the FFR-guided arm, FFR values were disclosed to the surgeons who revised the surgical protocol according to the functional significance of each coronary stenosis. The primary endpoint of the trial was the rate of graft occlusion at 12 months, assessed by coronary computed tomography or coronary angiography. The secondary endpoints were (1) length of postoperative hospital stay; (2) changes in surgical strategy depending upon FFR results (in FFR-guided group only); and (3) rate of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events, i.e., composite of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and any revascularization during the follow-up period. This study is the first prospective randomized trial investigating potential clinical benefits, associated with FFR-guided surgical revascularization. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01810224.

Six-Year Follow-Up of Fractional Flow Reserve-Guided Versus Angiography-Guided Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guided coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery has been associated with lower number of graft anastomoses, lower rate of on-pump surgery, and higher graft patency rate as compared with angiography-guided CABG surgery. However, no clinical benefit has been reported to date. METHODS AND RESULTS: Consecutive patients (n=627) treated by CABG between 2006 and 2010 were retrospectively included. In 198 patients, at least 1 stenosis was grafted according to FFR (FFR-guided group), whereas in 429 patients all stenoses were grafted based on angiography (angiography-guided group). The 2 coprimary end points were overall death or myocardial infarction and major adverse cardiovascular events (composite of overall death, myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization) up to 6-year follow-up. In the FFR-guided group, patients were significantly younger (66 [57-73] versus 70 [63-76]; P<0.001), more often male (82% versus 72%; P=0.008), and less often diabetic (21% versus 30%; P=0.023). Clinical follow-up (median, 85 [66-104] months) was analyzed in 396 patients after 1:1 propensity-score matching for these 3 variables. The rate of overall death or myocardial infarction was significantly lower in the FFR-guided (n=31 [16%] versus n=49 [25%]; hazard ratio, 0.59 [95% confidence interval, 0.38-0.93]; P=0.020) as compared with the angiography-guided group. Major adverse cardiovascular events rate was also numerically lower in the FFR-guided than in the angiography-guided group (n=42 [21%] versus n=52 [26%]; hazard ratio, 0.77 [95% confidence interval, 0.51-1.16]; P=0.21). CONCLUSIONS: FFR-guided CABG is associated with a significant reduction in the rate of overall death or myocardial infarction at 6-year follow-up as compared with angiography-guided CABG.

Fractional flow reserve to guide and to assess coronary artery bypass grafting.

The aim of this review is to highlight the role of invasive functional evaluation in patients in whom coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) is indicated, and to examine the clinical evidence available in favour of fractional flow reserve (FFR) adoption in these patients, outline appropriate use, as well as point out potential pitfalls. FFR after CABG will also be reviewed, highlighting its correct interpretation and adoption when applied to both native coronary arteries and bypass grafts. Practice European guidelines support the use of FFR to complement coronary angiography with the highest degree of recommendation (Class IA) for the assessment of coronary stenosis before undertaking myocardial revascularization when previous non-invasive functional evaluation is unavailable or not conclusive. As a result, FFR has been adopted in routine clinical practice to guide clinicians decision as to whether or not perform a revascularization. Of note, due to the increasing confidence of the interventional cardiologists, FFR guidance is also being implemented to indicate or guide CABG. This is in anticipation of supportive clear-cut evidence, since recommendations for FFR adoption were based on randomized clinical trials investigating percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) strategies in which patients with typical indications for CABG were excluded (e.g. left main disease, valvular disease, and coronary anatomy unsuitable for PCI). Based on the critical appraisal of the literature, FFR can play an important role in risk stratification and determining management strategy of patients either before or after CABG.

Fractional Flow Reserve-Guided Revascularization in Patients With Aortic Stenosis.

Fractional flow reserve (FFR) has never been investigated in patients with aortic stenosis (AS). From 2002 to 2010, we identified 106 patients with AS and coronary artery disease with at least one intermediate lesion treated according to FFR guidance. We matched 212 contemporary control patients with AS in which revascularization was decided on angiography only. More patients in the FFR-guided group underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (24% vs 13%; p = 0.019), whereas there was a trend toward less coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) performed. After FFR, the number of diseased vessels was downgraded within the FFR-guided group (from 1.85 ± 0.97 to 1.48 ± 1; p <0.01) and compared with the angio-guided group (1.48 ± 1 vs 1.8 ± 0.97; p <0.01). Less aortic valve replacement was reported in the FFR-guided group (46% vs 57%; p = 0.056). In patients who underwent CABG, less venous conduits (0.5 ± 0.69 vs 0.73 ± 0.76; p = 0.05) and anastomoses (0.61 ± 0.85 vs 0.94 ± 1; p = 0.032) were necessary in the FFR-guided group. Up to 5 years, we found no difference in major adverse cardiac events (38% vs 39%; p = 0.98), overall death (32% vs 31%; p = 0.68), nonfatal myocardial infarction (2% vs 2%; p = 0.79), and revascularization (8% vs 7%; p = 0.76) between the 2 groups. In conclusion, FFR guidance impacts the management of selected patients with moderate or severe AS and coronary artery disease by resulting into deferral of aortic valve replacement, more patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention, and in patients treated with CABG, into less venous grafts and anastomoses without increasing adverse event rates up to 5 years.

Clinical Outcome of Patients with Aortic Stenosis and Coronary Artery Disease Not Treated According to Current Recommendations.

We evaluated the clinical outcome of patients with moderate/severe aortic stenosis and significant coronary disease not treated according to guidelines, recommending combined aortic valve replacement (AVR) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). From 2002 to 2010, we assessed death up to 5 years in 650 patients with moderate/severe aortic stenosis and at least one coronary lesion (>50 %): 23 % were treated conservatively (MT), 17 % with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), 11 % with AVR, and 49 % with combined CABG and AVR. At a median follow-up of 58 months, overall death decreased over the groups (MT, 68 % vs. PCI, 44 % vs. AVR, 34 % vs. CABG and AVR, 23 %, p < 0.01). Compared to the MT group, Cox regression analysis adjusted for potential confounders showed significantly reduced mortality in the PCI, AVR, and CABG and AVR groups. When combined CABG and AVR is not feasible, PCI or AVR alone still improves significantly long-term survival as compared with MT alone.

Intracoronary Adenosine: Dose-Response Relationship With Hyperemia.

OBJECTIVES: The present study sought to establish the dosage of intracoronary (IC) adenosine associated with minimal side effects and above which no further increase in flow can be expected. BACKGROUND: Despite the widespread adoption of IC adenosine in clinical practice, no wide-ranging, dose-response study has been conducted. A recurring debate still exists regarding its optimal dose. METHODS: In 30 patients, Doppler-derived flow velocity measurements were obtained in 10 right coronary arteries (RCAs) and 20 left coronary arteries (LCAs) free of stenoses >20% in diameter. Flow velocity was measured at baseline and after 8 ml bolus administrations of arterial blood, saline, contrast medium, and 9 escalating doses of adenosine (4 to 500 µg). The hyperemic value was expressed in percent of the maximum flow velocity reached in a given artery (Q/Qmax, %). RESULTS: Q/Qmax did not increase significantly beyond dosages of 60 µg for the RCA and 160 µg for LCA. Heart rate did not change, whereas mean arterial blood pressure decreased by a maximum of 7% (p < 0.05) after bolus injections of IC adenosine. The incidence of transient A-V blocks was 40% after injection of 100 µg in the RCA and was 15% after injection of 200 µg in the LCA. The duration of the plateau reached 12 ± 13 s after injection of 100 µg in the RCA and 21 ± 6 s after the injection of 200 µg in the LCA. A progressive prolongation of the time needed to return to baseline was observed. Hyperemic response after injection of 8 ml of contrast medium reached 65 ± 36% of that achieved after injection of 200 µg of adenosine. CONCLUSIONS: This wide-ranging, dose-response study indicates that an IC adenosine bolus injection of 100 µg in the RCA and 200 µg in the LCA induces maximum hyperemia while being associated with minimal side effects.

Revascularization decisions in patients with stable angina and intermediate lesions: results of the international survey on interventional strategy.

BACKGROUND: Fractional flow reserve (FFR) measurement of intermediate coronary stenoses is recommended by guidelines when demonstration of ischemia by noninvasive testing is unavailable. The study aims to evaluate the penetration of this recommendation into current thinking about revascularization strategies for stable coronary artery disease. METHODS AND RESULTS: International Survey on Interventional Strategy was conducted via a web-based platform. First, participants' experiences in interventional cardiology were queried. Second, 5 complete angiograms were provided, presenting only focal intermediate stenoses. FFR and quantitative coronary angiography values were known; however, remained undisclosed. Determination of stenosis significance was asked for each lesion. In cases of uncertainty, the most appropriate adjunctive invasive diagnostic method among quantitative coronary angiography, intravascular ultrasound, optical coherence tomography, or FFR needed to be selected. International Survey on Interventional Strategy was taken by 495 participants who provided 4421 lesion evaluations. In 3158 (71%) decisions, participants relied solely on angiographic appearance that was discordant in 47% with the known FFR, using 0.80 as cutoff value. The use of FFR and imaging modalities was requested in 21% and 8%, respectively. Comparing 4 groups of participants according to the experience in FFR, angiogram-based decisions were less frequent with increasing experience (77% versus 72% versus 69% versus 67%, respectively; P<0.001). As a result, requests for FFR were more frequent (14% versus 19% versus 24% versus 28%, respectively; P<0.001) and rates of discordant decisions decreased (51% versus 49% versus 47% versus 43%, respectively; P<0.022). CONCLUSIONS: The findings confirm that, even when all potential external constraints are virtually eliminated, visual estimation continues to dominate the treatment decisions for intermediate stenoses, indicative of a worrisome disconnect between recommendations and current practice.