Intracoronary electrocardiogram detects coronary microvascular dysfunction and ischemia in patients with no obstructive coronary arteries disease.

BACKGROUND: Coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMD) is the leading cause of ischemia with no obstructive coronary arteries disease (INOCA) disease. Diagnosis of CMD relies on surrogate physiological indices without objective proof of ischemia. OBJECTIVES: Intracoronary electrocardiogram (icECG) derived hyperemic indices may accurately and objectively detect CMD and reversible ischemia in related territory. METHODS: INOCA patients with proven ischemia by myocardial perfusion scan (MPS) and completely normal coronary arteries underwent simultaneous intracoronary electrophysiological (icECG) and physiological (intracoronary Doppler) assessment in all 3 coronary arteries during rest and under adenosine induced hyperemia. RESULTS: Sixty vessels in 21 patients were included in the final analysis. All patients had at least one vessel with abnormal CFR. 41 vessels had CMD (CFR < 2.5), of which 26 had increased microvascular resistance (structural CMD, HMR > 1.9 mmHg.cm-1.s) and 15 vessels had CMD (CFR < 2.5) with normal microvascular resistance (functional CMD, HMR <= 1.9 mmHg.cm-1.s). Only one-third of the patients (n = 7) had impaired CFR < 2.5 in all 3 epicardial arteries. Absolute ST shift between hyperemia and rest (∆ST) has shown the best diagnostic performance for ischemia (cut-off 0.10 mV, sensitivity: 95%, specificity: 72%, accuracy: 80%, AUC: 0.860) outperforming physiological indices (CFR: 0.623 and HMR: 0.653 DeLong's test P = .0002). CONCLUSIONS: In INOCA patients, CMD involves coronary artery territories heterogeneously. icECG can accurately detect CMD causing perfusion abnormalities in patients with INOCA outperforming physiological CMD markers, by demonstrating actual ischemia instead of predicting the likelihood of inducible ischemia based on violated surrogate thresholds of blunted flow reserve or increased minimum microvascular resistance. CONDENSED ABSTRACT: In 21 INOCA patients with coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMD) and myocardial perfusion scan proved ischemia, hyperemic indices of intracoronary electrocardiogram (icECG) have accurately detected vessel-specific CMD and resulting perfusion abnormalities & ischemia, outperforming invasive hemodynamic indices. Absolute ST shift between hyperemia and rest (∆ST) has shown the best classification performance for ischemia in no Obstructive Coronary Arteries (AUC: 0.860) outperforming Doppler derived CMD indices (CFR: 0.623 and HMR: 0.653 DeLong's test P = .0002).icECG can be used to diagnose CMD causing perfusion defects by demonstrating actual reversible ischemia at vessel-level during the initial CAG session, obviating the need for further costly ischemia tests. CLINICALTRIALS: GOV: NCT05471739.

Deferred Versus Performed Revascularization for Left Main Coronary Disease With Hemodynamic Significance.

BACKGROUND: The majority of randomized controlled trials of revascularization decision-making excludes left main coronary artery disease (LMD). Therefore, contemporary clinical outcomes of patients with stable coronary artery disease and LMD with proven ischemia remain poorly understood. The aim of this study was to assess the long-term clinical outcomes of physiologically significant LMD according to the treatment strategies of revascularization versus revascularization deferral. METHODS: In this international multicenter registry of stable LMD interrogated with the instantaneous wave-free ratio, patients with physiologically significant ischemia (instantaneous wave-free ratio ≤0.89) were analyzed according to the coronary revascularization (n=151) versus revascularization deferral (n=74). Propensity score matching was performed to adjust for baseline clinical characteristics. The primary end point was a composite of death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization of left main stem. The secondary end points were as follows: cardiac death or spontaneous LMD-related myocardial infarction; and ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization of left main stem. RESULTS: At a median follow-up period of 2.8 years, the primary end point occurred in 11 patients (14.9%) in the revascularized group and 21 patients (28.4%) in the deferred group (hazard ratio, 0.42 [95% CI, 0.20-0.89]; P=0.023). For the secondary end points, cardiac death or LMD-related myocardial infarction occurred significantly less frequently in the revascularized group (0.0% versus 8.1%; P=0.004). The rate of ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization of left main stem was also significantly lower in the revascularized group (5.4% versus 17.6%; hazard ratio, 0.20 [95% CI, 0.056-0.70]; P=0.012). CONCLUSIONS: In patients who underwent revascularization for stable coronary artery disease and physiologically significant LMD determined by instantaneous wave-free ratio, the long-term clinical outcomes were significantly improved as compared with those in whom revascularization was deferred.

Physiology-guided PCI versus CABG for left main coronary artery disease: insights from the DEFINE-LM registry.

There have been no studies comparing clinical outcomes of physiology-guided revascularization in patients with unprotected left main coronary disease (ULMD) between percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) vs. coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). The aim of this study was to assess the long-term clinical outcomes between PCI and CABG of patients with physiologically significant ULMD. From an international multicenter registry of ULMD patients interrogated with instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR), we analyzed data from 151 patients (85 PCI vs. 66 CABG) who underwent revascularization according to the cutoff value of iFR ≤ 0.89. Propensity score matching was employed to adjust for baseline clinical characteristics. The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization. The secondary endpoints were the individual components of the primary endpoint. Mean age was 66.6 (± 9.2) years, 79.2% male. Mean SYNTAX score was 22.6 (± 8.4) and median iFR was 0.83 (IQR 0.74-0.87). After performing propensity score matching analysis, 48 patients treated with CABG were matched to those who underwent PCI. At a median follow-up period of 2.8 years, the primary endpoint occurred in 8.3% in PCI group and 20.8% in CABG group, respectively (HR 3.80; 95% CI 1.04-13.9; p = 0.043). There was no difference in each component of the primary event (p > 0.05 for all). Within the present study, iFR-guided PCI was associated with lower cardiovascular events rate in patients with ULMD and intermediate SYNTAX score, as compared to CABG. State-of-the-art PCI vs. CABG for ULMD. Study design and primary endpoint in patients with physiologically significant ULMD. MACE was defined as the composite of all-cause death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization. The blue line denotes the PCI arm, and the red line denotes the CABG arm. PCI was associated with significantly lower risk of MACE than CABG. CABG: coronary artery bypass grafting; iFR: instantaneous wave-free ratio; MACE: major adverse cardiovascular events; PCI: percutaneous coronary intervention; ULMD: unprotected left main coronary artery disease.

Immediate impact of coronary artery bypass graft surgery on regional myocardial perfusion: Results from the Collaborative Pilot Study to Determine the Correlation Between Intraoperative Observations Using Spy Near-Infrared Imaging and Cardiac Catheterization Laboratory Physiological Assessment of Lesion Severity.

Objectives: Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is performed using anatomic guidance. Data connecting the physiologic significance of the coronary vessel stenosis to the acute physiologic response to grafting are lacking. The Collaborative Pilot Study to Determine the Correlation Between Intraoperative Observations Using Spy Near-Infrared Imaging and Cardiac Catheterization Laboratory Physiological Assessment of Lesion Severity study is the first to compare preintervention coronary physiology with the acute regional myocardial perfusion change (RMP-QC) at CABG in a per-graft analysis. Methods: Non-emergent patients undergoing diagnostic catheterization suitable for multivessel CABG were enrolled. Synergy between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention with Taxus score, fractional flow reserve (FFR), instantaneous wave free ratio (iFR), and quantitative coronary angiography was documented in 75 epicardial coronary arteries, with 62 angiographically intermediate and 13 severe stenoses. At CABG, near-infrared fluorescence analysis quantified the relative change (post- vs pregrafting, termed RMP-QC) in the grafted vessel's perfusion territory. Scatter plots were constructed for RMP-QC versus quantitative coronary angiography and RMP-QC versus FFR/iFR. Exact quadrant randomization test for randomness was used. Results: There was no relationship between RMP-QC and quantitative coronary angiography percent diameter stenosis, whether all study vessels were included (P = .949) or vessels with core-lab quantitative coronary angiography only (P = .922). A significant nonrandom association between RMP-QC and FFR (P = .025), as well as between RMP-QC and iFR (P = .008), was documented. These associations remained when excluding vessels with assigned FFR and iFR values (P = .0092 and P = .0006 for FFR and iFR, respectively). Conclusions: The Collaborative Pilot Study to Determine the Correlation Between Intraoperative Observations Using Spy Near-Infrared Imaging and Cardiac Catheterization Laboratory Physiological Assessment of Lesion Severity study demonstrates there is no association between angiographic coronary stenosis severity and the acute perfusion change after grafting; there is an association between functional stenosis severity and absolute increase in regional myocardial perfusion after CABG.

Comparing invasive hemodynamic responses in adenosine hyperemia versus physical exercise stress in chronic coronary syndromes.

OBJECTIVES: Adenosine hyperemia is an integral component of the physiological assessment of obstructive coronary artery disease in patients with chronic coronary syndrome (CCS). The aim of this study was to compare systemic, coronary and microcirculatory hemodynamics between intravenous (IV) adenosine hyperemia versus physical exercise stress in patients with CCS and coronary stenosis. METHODS: Twenty-three patients (mean age, 60.6 ± 8.1 years) with CCS and single-vessel coronary stenosis underwent cardiac catheterization. Continuous trans-stenotic coronary pressure-flow measurements were performed during: i) IV adenosine hyperemia, and ii) physical exercise using a catheter-table-mounted supine ergometer. Systemic, coronary and microcirculatory hemodynamic responses were compared between IV adenosine and exercise stimuli. RESULTS: Mean stenosis diameter was 74.6% ± 10.4. Median (interquartile range) FFR was 0.54 (0.44-0.72). At adenosine hyperemia versus exercise stress, mean aortic pressure (Pa, 91 ± 16 mmHg vs 99 ± 15 mmHg, p < 0.0001), distal coronary pressure (Pd, 58 ± 21 mmHg vs 69 ± 24 mmHg, p < 0.0001), trans-stenotic pressure ratio (Pd/Pa, 0.63 ± 0.18 vs 0.69 ± 0.19, p < 0.0001), microvascular resistance (MR, 2.9 ± 2.2 mmHg.cm-1.sec-1 vs 4.2 ± 1.7 mmHg.cm-1.sec-1, p = 0.001), heart rate (HR, 80 ± 15 bpm vs 85 ± 21 bpm, p = 0.02) and rate-pressure product (RPP, 7522 ± 2335 vs 9077 ± 3200, p = 0.0001) were all lower. Conversely, coronary flow velocity (APV, 23.7 ± 9.5 cm/s vs 18.5 ± 6.8 cm/s, p = 0.02) was higher. Additionally, temporal changes in Pa, Pd, Pd/Pa, MR, HR, RPP and APV during IV adenosine hyperemia versus exercise were all significantly different (p < 0.05 for all). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with CCS and coronary stenosis, invasive hemodynamic responses differed markedly between IV adenosine hyperemia versus physical exercise stress. These differences were observed across systemic, coronary and microcirculatory hemodynamics.

Safety of Revascularization Deferral of Left Main Stenosis Based on Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio Evaluation.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the long-term clinical outcomes of patients with left main coronary artery (LM) stenosis in whom treatment strategy was based on the instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR). BACKGROUND: The overall safety of iFR to guide revascularization decision making in patients with stable coronary artery disease has been established. However, no study has examined the safety of deferral of revascularization of LM disease on the basis of iFR. METHODS: This multicenter observational study included 314 patients in whom LM stenosis was deferred (n = 163 [51.9%]) or revascularized (n = 151 [48.1%]) according to the iFR cutoff ≤0.89. The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization. The secondary endpoints were each individual component of the primary endpoint and also cardiac death. RESULTS: At a median follow-up period of 30 months, the primary endpoint occurred in 15 patients (9.2%) in the deferred group and 22 patients (14.6%) in the revascularized group (hazard ratio: 1.45; 95% confidence interval: 0.75 to 2.81; p = 0.26), indicating no evidence of a significant difference between the 2 groups. For the secondary endpoints, findings in the iFR-based deferral and revascularization groups were as follows: all-cause death, 3.7% versus 4.6%; cardiac death, 1.2% versus 2.0%; nonfatal myocardial infarction, 2.5% versus 5.3%; and target lesion revascularization, 4.3% versus 5.3% (p > 0.05 for all). CONCLUSIONS: Deferral of revascularization of LM stenosis on the basis of iFR appears to be safe, with similar long-term outcomes to those in patients in whom LM revascularization was performed according to iFR values.

Adverse Plaque Characteristics Relate More Strongly With Hyperemic Fractional Flow Reserve and Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio Than With Resting Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio.

OBJECTIVES: The current substudy of the PACIFIC (Prospective Comparison of Cardiac PET/CT, SPECT/CT Perfusion Imaging and CT Coronary Angiography With Invasive Coronary Angiography) trial explores the impact of computed tomography (CT)-derived unfavorable plaque features on both hyperemic and non-hyperemic flow indices. BACKGROUND: Next to lesion severity, plaque vulnerability as assessed using coronary CT angiography affects fractional flow reserve (FFR), which is associated with imminent acute coronary syndromes. Instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) has recently emerged as an alternative for FFR to interrogate coronary lesions for ischemia. It is, however, unknown whether vasodilator-free assessment with iFR is associated with plaque stability similarly as FFR. METHODS: Of 120 patients (62% men, age 58.3 ± 8.6 years) with suspected coronary artery disease, 257 vessels were prospectively evaluated. Each patient underwent 256-slice coronary CT angiography to assess stenosis severity and plaque features (positive remodeling [PR], low attenuation plaque [LAP], spotty calcification [SC], and napkin ring sign [NRS]), as well as intracoronary pressure measurements (FFR, iFR, Pd/Pa, and pressure ratio during adenosine within the wave-free period [iFRa]). CT-derived plaque characteristics were related to these invasive pressure measurements. RESULTS: Atherosclerotic plaques were present in 170 (66%) coronary arteries. On a per-vessel basis, luminal stenosis severity was significantly associated with impaired FFR, iFR, Pd/Pa, and iFRa. Multivariable analysis revealed that FFR and iFR were independently related to ≥70% stenosis (-0.10, p < 0.001 and -0.09, p = 0.003, respectively) and plaque volume (-0.02, p = 0.020 and -0.02, p = 0.030, respectively). Additionally, PR and SC were also independent predictors of an impaired FFR (-0.10, p < 0.001 and -0.07, p = 0.021, respectively), but adverse plaque characteristics were not independently related to the vasodilator-free iFR. CONCLUSIONS: CT-derived vulnerable plaque characteristics are independently associated with hyperemic flow indices as assessed with FFR and iFRa, but not with non-hyperemic indices such as iFR and Pd/Pa. These findings suggest that the effects of hyperemia on pressure-derived indices might depend not only on hemodynamic stenosis severity but also on plaque characteristics.

Clinical Implication of Quantitative Flow Ratio After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for 3-Vessel Disease.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of post-percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) quantitative flow ratio (QFR) on clinical outcomes in patients with de novo 3-vessel disease (3VD) treated with contemporary PCI. BACKGROUND: The clinical impact of post-PCI QFR in patients treated with state-of-the-art PCI for de novo 3VD is undetermined. METHODS: All vessels treated in the SYNTAX (SYNergy between percutaneous coronary intervention with TAXus and cardiac surgery) II trial were retrospectively screened and analyzed for post-PCI QFR. The primary endpoint of this substudy was vessel-oriented composite endpoint (VOCE) at 2 years, defined as the composite of vessel-related cardiac death, vessel-related myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization. The receiver-operating characteristic curve was used to calculate the optimal cutoff value of post-PCI QFR for predicting 2-year VOCE. All the analyzable vessels were stratified on the basis of the optimal cutoff value. RESULTS: A total of 968 vessels treated with PCI were screened. Post-PCI QFR was analyzable in 771 (79.6%) vessels. A total of 52 (6.7%) VOCEs occurred at 2 years. The mean value of post-PCI QFR was 0.91 ± 0.07. The diagnostic performance of post-PCI QFR to predict 2-year VOCE was moderate (area under the curve: 0.702; 95% confidence interval: 0.633 to 0.772), with the optimal cutoff value of post-PCI QFR for predicting 2-year VOCE 0.91 (sensitivity 0.652, specificity 0.635). The incidence of 2-year VOCE in the vessels with post-PCI QFR <0.91 (n = 284) was significantly higher compared with vessels with post-PCI QFR ≥0.91 (n = 487) (12.0% vs. 3.7%; hazard ratio: 3.37; 95% confidence interval: 1.91 to 5.97; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: A higher post-PCI QFR value is associated with improved vessel-related clinical outcomes in state-of-the art PCI practice for de novo 3VD. Achieving a post-PCI QFR value ≥0.91 in all treated vessels should be a target when treating de novo 3VD. These findings require confirmation in future prospective trials.

Temporal Changes in Coronary Hyperemic and Resting Hemodynamic Indices in Nonculprit Vessels of Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction.

Importance: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of nonculprit vessels among patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is associated with improved clinical outcome compared with culprit vessel-only PCI. Fractional flow reserve (FFR) and coronary flow reserve are hyperemic indices used to guide revascularization. Recently, instantaneous wave-free ratio was introduced as a nonhyperemic alternative to FFR. Whether these indices can be used in the acute setting of STEMI continues to be investigated. Objective: To assess the value of hemodynamic indices in nonculprit vessels of patients with STEMI from the index event to 1-month follow-up. Design, Setting, and Participants: This substudy of the Reducing Micro Vascular Dysfunction in Revascularized STEMI Patients by Off-target Properties of Ticagrelor (REDUCE-MVI) randomized clinical trial enrolled 98 patients with STEMI who had an angiographic intermediate stenosis in at least 1 nonculprit vessel. Patient enrollment was between May 1, 2015, and September 19, 2017. After successful primary PCI, nonculprit intracoronary hemodynamic measurements were performed and repeated at 1-month follow-up. Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging was performed from 2 to 7 days and 1 month after primary PCI. Main Outcomes and Measures: The value of nonculprit instantaneous wave-free ratio, FFR, coronary flow reserve, hyperemic index of microcirculatory resistance, and resting microcirculatory resistance from the index event to 1-month follow-up. Results: Of 73 patients with STEMI included in the final analysis, 59 (80.8%) were male, with a mean (SD) age of 60.8 (9.9) years. Instantaneous wave-free ratio (SD) did not change significantly (0.93 [0.07] vs 0.94 [0.06]; P = .12) and there was no change in resting distal pressure/aortic pressure (mean [SD], 0.94 [0.06] vs 0.95 [0.06]; P = .25) from the acute moment to 1-month follow-up. The FFR decreased (mean [SD], 0.88 [0.07] vs 0.86 [0.09]; P = .001) whereas coronary flow reserve increased (mean [SD], 2.9 [1.4] vs 4.1 [2.2]; P < .001). Hyperemic index of microcirculatory resistance decreased and resting microcirculatory resistance increased from the acute moment to follow-up. The decrease in distal pressure from rest to hyperemia was smaller at the acute moment vs follow-up (mean [SD], 10.6 [11.2] mm Hg vs 14.1 [14.2] mm Hg; P = .05). This blunted acute hyperemic response correlated with final infarct size (ρ, -0.29; P = .02). The resistive reserve ratio was lower at the acute moment vs follow-up (mean [SD], 3.4 [1.7] vs 5.0 [2.7]; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: In the acute setting of STEMI, nonculprit coronary flow reserve was reduced and FFR was augmented, whereas instantaneous wave-free ratio was not altered. These results may be explained by an increased hyperemic microvascular resistance and a blunted adenosine responsiveness at the acute moment that was associated with infarct size.

Fractional flow reserve, instantaneous wave-free ratio, and resting Pd/Pa compared with [15O]H2O positron emission tomography myocardial perfusion imaging: a PACIFIC trial sub-study.

Aims: Guidelines recommend the use of fractional flow reserve (FFR) to guide percutaneous coronary intervention. For this purpose, physiological lesion assessment without adenosine may have a similar diagnostic accuracy as FFR. We aimed to investigate the performances of FFR, resting instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR), and resting Pd/Pa compared with [15O]H2O positron emission tomography (PET) perfusion imaging. Methods and results: [15O]H2O PET and intracoronary pressure measurements were evaluated in 320 coronary arteries (of which 136 coronary stenoses) in 129 stable patients. The primary analysis consisting of the area-under-the-receiver-operating-characteristic curve for impaired PET hyperaemic myocardial blood flow (MBF) <2.3 mL⋅min-1⋅g-1 in coronary stenoses was 0.78 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.70-0.85] for FFR, 0.74 (95% CI: 0.66-0.81) for iFR, and 0.75 (95% CI: 0.67-0.82) for Pd/Pa. No significant differences between area-under-the-receiver-operating-characteristic curve were observed for any two indices compared. In a secondary analysis, the diagnostic accuracy compared with impaired PET hyperaemic MBF in coronary stenoses was 72% (95% CI: 64-79%, κ: 0.44) for FFR ≤0.80, 72% (95% CI: 64-80%, κ: 0.44) for iFR ≤0.89, and 70% (95% CI: 62-78%, κ: 0.40) for Pd/Pa ≤0.92. Other secondary analyses included a comparison of physiological indices with PET hyperaemic MBF in all vessels and all of the aforementioned analyses using PET myocardial perfusion reserve as comparator. Statistical testing for the secondary analyses showed results that were consistent with the results of the primary analysis. Conclusion: Fractional flow reserve, iFR, and Pd/Pa showed a similar performance when compared with PET imaging. Our results support the validity of invasive physiological lesion assessment under resting conditions by iFR or Pd/Pa. Trial registration: Sub-study of the PACIFIC trial with clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01521468.

Evaluation of intermediate coronary stenoses in acute coronary syndromes using pressure guidewire.

Fractional flow reserve (FFR) is increasingly used to guide myocardial revascularisation. However, supporting evidence regarding its use originates from studies that have enrolled mainly patients with stable angina, while patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) have not been included. Notably, multifactorial microvascular dysfunction and an increased sympathetic tone in patients with ACS may lead to blunted response to adenosine and false-negative results of FFR due to submaximal hyperaemia. This may raise the possibility of deferring treatment of stenosis that instead would have needed dilatation, thus leaving a residual risk of preventable cardiac events. In this literature review, we aim at summarising laboratory and clinical investigations concerning the use of FFR in culprit and non-culprit lesions in ACS. Furthermore, we will report recent data on instantaneous wave-free ratio, an adenosine-free index of functional stenosis severity, in stable coronary artery disease and in patients with ACS.

Use of the Instantaneous Wave-free Ratio or Fractional Flow Reserve in PCI.

BACKGROUND: Coronary revascularization guided by fractional flow reserve (FFR) is associated with better patient outcomes after the procedure than revascularization guided by angiography alone. It is unknown whether the instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR), an alternative measure that does not require the administration of adenosine, will offer benefits similar to those of FFR. METHODS: We randomly assigned 2492 patients with coronary artery disease, in a 1:1 ratio, to undergo either iFR-guided or FFR-guided coronary revascularization. The primary end point was the 1-year risk of major adverse cardiac events, which were a composite of death from any cause, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or unplanned revascularization. The trial was designed to show the noninferiority of iFR to FFR, with a margin of 3.4 percentage points for the difference in risk. RESULTS: At 1 year, the primary end point had occurred in 78 of 1148 patients (6.8%) in the iFR group and in 83 of 1182 patients (7.0%) in the FFR group (difference in risk, -0.2 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -2.3 to 1.8; P<0.001 for noninferiority; hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.68 to 1.33; P=0.78). The risk of each component of the primary end point and of death from cardiovascular or noncardiovascular causes did not differ significantly between the groups. The number of patients who had adverse procedural symptoms and clinical signs was significantly lower in the iFR group than in the FFR group (39 patients [3.1%] vs. 385 patients [30.8%], P<0.001), and the median procedural time was significantly shorter (40.5 minutes vs. 45.0 minutes, P=0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Coronary revascularization guided by iFR was noninferior to revascularization guided by FFR with respect to the risk of major adverse cardiac events at 1 year. The rate of adverse procedural signs and symptoms was lower and the procedural time was shorter with iFR than with FFR. (Funded by Philips Volcano; DEFINE-FLAIR ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02053038 .).

Physiology-guided myocardial revascularisation in complex multivessel coronary artery disease: beyond the 2014 ESC/EACTS guidelines on myocardial revascularisation.

For patients with multivessel coronary artery disease there are two options for revascularisation: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery (CABG). In daily clinical practice, a heart team consisting of an interventional cardiologist and a cardiothoracic surgeon decide on the most appropriate mode of revascularization. The current European guidelines on myocardial revascularisation include updated recommendations for patients with multivessel coronary artery disease. In patients with stable angina, three-vessel disease and a SYNTAX score of 23-32 or >32 a class I level of evidence A recommendation for CABG was issued as compared to PCI which received a class III recommendation. Although the authors of this viewpoint greatly appreciate the efforts of the guideline committee, we believe that it was an oversight not to include recommendations on physiology-guided PCI in multivessel disease (MVD). In this viewpoint, it is argued that physiology-guided revascularization using current-generation drug-eluting stents is a reasonable alternative for complex multivessel disease.

A new method of applying randomised control study data to the individual patient: A novel quantitative patient-centred approach to interpreting composite end points.

BACKGROUND: Modern randomised controlled trials typically use composite endpoints. This is only valid if each endpoint is equally important to patients but few trials document patient preference and seek the relative importance of components of combined endpoints. If patients weigh endpoints differentially, our interpretation of trial data needs to be refined. METHODS AND RESULTS: We derive a quantitative, structured tool to determine the relative importance of each endpoint to patients. We then apply this tool to data comparing angioplasty with drug-eluting stents to bypass surgery. The survey was administered to patients undergoing cardiac catheterisation. A meta-analysis comparing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) to percutaneous coronary interventuin (PCI) was then performed using (a) standard MACE and (b) patient-centred MACE. Patients considered stroke worse than death (stroke 102.3 ± 19.6%, p < 0.01), and MI and repeat revascularisation less severe than death (61.9 ± 26.8% and 41.9 ± 25.4% respectively p < 0.01 for both). 7 RCTs (5251 patients) were eligible. Meta-analysis demonstrated that standard MACE occurs more frequently with PCI than surgery (OR 1.44; 95% CI 1.10 to 1.87; p = 0.007). Re-analysis using patient-centred MACE found no significant difference between PCI and CABG (OR 1.22, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.53; p = 0.10). CONCLUSIONS: Patients do not consider the constituent endpoints of MACE equal. We derive a novel patient-centred metric that recognises and quantifies the differences attributed to each endpoint. When patient preference data are applied to contemporary trial results, there is no significant difference between PCI and CABG. Responses from individual patients in clinic could be used to give individual patients a recommendation that is truly personalised.

Head-to-head comparison of basal stenosis resistance index, instantaneous wave-free ratio, and fractional flow reserve: diagnostic accuracy for stenosis-specific myocardial ischaemia.

AIMS: We sought to compare the diagnostic accuracy of basal stenosis resistance index (BSR), instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) and fractional flow reserve (FFR) for stenosis-specific myocardial ischaemia identified by means of a combined reference standard of myocardial perfusion scintigraphy and the hyperaemic stenosis resistance index. METHODS AND RESULTS: BSR and FFR were determined for 299 coronary stenoses, iFR was determined for 85 coronary stenoses (iFR cohort). The discriminative value for stenosis-specific myocardial ischaemia was compared by means of the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves (AUC). Classification agreement with the reference standard was determined according to ROC curve-derived ischaemic cut-off values, as well as according to clinical cut-off values, equivalent to the 0.80 FFR cut-off. Across all stenoses, the discriminative value of BSR and FFR was equivalent (AUC: 0.90 and 0.91, respectively, p=0.46). In the iFR cohort, the discriminative value was equivalent for BSR, iFR, and FFR (AUC: 0.88, 0.84, and 0.88, respectively; p≥0.20 for all). At both ischaemic as well as clinical cut-off values, classification agreement with the reference standard was equivalent for BSR and FFR across all stenoses, as well as for BSR, iFR, and FFR in the iFR cohort. CONCLUSIONS: BSR, iFR, and FFR have equivalent diagnostic accuracy for the detection of ischaemia-generating coronary stenoses.

Aortic reservoir pressure corresponds to cyclic changes in aortic volume: physiological validation in humans.

OBJECTIVE: Aortic reservoir pressure indices independently predict cardiovascular events and mortality. Despite this, there has never been a study in humans to determine whether the theoretical principles of the mathematically derived aortic reservoir pressure (RP(derived)) and excess pressure (XP(derived)) model have a real physiological basis. This study aimed to directly measure the aortic reservoir (AR(direct); by cyclic change in aortic volume) and determine its relationship with RP(derived), XP(derived), and aortic blood pressure (BP). APPROACH AND RESULTS: Ascending aortic BP and Doppler flow velocity were recorded via intra-arterial wire in 10 men (aged 62 ± 12 years) during coronary artery bypass surgery. Simultaneous ascending aortic transesophageal echocardiography was used to measure AR(direct). Published mathematical formulae were used to determine RP(derived) and XP(derived). AR(direct) was strongly and linearly related to RP(derived) during systole (r=0.988; P<0.001) and diastole (r=0.985; P<0.001). Peak cross-correlation (r=0.98) occurred at a phase lag of 0.004 s into the cardiac cycle, suggesting close temporal agreement between waveforms. The relationship between aortic BP and AR(direct) was qualitatively similar to the cyclic relationship between aortic BP and RP(derived), with peak cross-correlations occurring at identical phase lags (AR(direct) versus aortic BP, r=0.96 at 0.06 s; RP(derived) versus aortic BP, r=0.98 at 0.06 s). CONCLUSIONS: RP(derived) is highly correlated with changes in proximal aortic volume, consistent with its physiological interpretation as corresponding to the instantaneous volume of blood stored in the aorta. Thus, aortic reservoir pressure should be considered in the interpretation of the central BP waveform.

Influence of gender on clinical outcomes following transcatheter aortic valve implantation from the UK transcatheter aortic valve implantation registry and the National Institute for Cardiovascular Outcomes Research.

Gender differences exist in outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass graft surgery but have yet to be fully explored after transcatheter aortic valve implantation. We aimed to investigate gender differences after transcatheter aortic valve implantation in the UK National Institute for Cardiovascular Outcomes Research registry. A retrospective analysis was performed of Medtronic CoreValve and Edwards SAPIEN implantation in 1,627 patients (756 women) from January 2007 to December 2010. Men had more risk factors: poor left ventricular systolic function (11.9% vs 5.5%, p <0.001), 3-vessel disease (19.4% vs 9.2%, p <0.001), previous myocardial infarction (29.5% vs 13.0%, p <0.001), peripheral vascular disease (32.4% vs 23.3%, p <0.001), and higher logistic EuroSCORE (21.8 ± 14.2% vs 21.0 ± 13.4%, p = 0.046). Thirty-day mortality was 6.3% (confidence interval 4.3% to 7.9%) in women and 7.4% (5.6% to 9.2%) in men and at 1 year, 21.9% (18.7% to 25.1%) and 22.4% (19.4% to 25.4%), respectively. There was no mortality difference: p = 0.331 by log-rank test; hazard ratio for women 0.91 (0.75 to 1.10). Procedural success (96.6% in women vs 96.4% in men, p = 0.889) and 30-day cerebrovascular event rates (3.8% vs 3.7%, p = 0.962) did not differ. Women had more major vascular complications (7.5% vs 4.2%, p = 0.004) and less moderate or severe postprocedural aortic regurgitation (7.5% vs 12.5%, p = 0.001). In conclusion, despite a higher risk profile in men, there was no gender-related mortality difference; however, women had more major vascular complications and less postprocedural moderate or severe aortic regurgitation.

Hemodynamic response to intravenous adenosine and its effect on fractional flow reserve assessment: results of the Adenosine for the Functional Evaluation of Coronary Stenosis Severity (AFFECTS) study.

BACKGROUND: We studied the hemodynamic response to intravenous adenosine on calculation of fractional flow reserve (FFR). Intravenous adenosine is widely used to achieve conditions of stable hyperemia for measurement of FFR. However, intravenous adenosine affects both systemic and coronary vascular beds differentially. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 283 patients (310 coronary stenoses) underwent coronary angiography with FFR using intravenous adenosine 140 mcg/kg per minute via a central femoral vein. Offline analysis was performed to calculate aortic (Pa), distal intracoronary (Pd), and reservoir (Pr) pressure at baseline, peak, and stable hyperemia. Seven different hemodynamic patterns were observed according to Pa and Pd change at peak and stable hyperemia. The average time from baseline to stable hyperemia was 68.2±38.5 seconds, when both ΔPa and ΔPd were decreased (ΔPa, -10.2±10.5 mm Hg; ΔPd, -18.2±10.8 mm Hg; P<0.001 for both). The fall in Pa closely correlated with the reduction in peripheral Pr (ΔPr, -12.9±15.7 mm Hg; P<0.001; r=0.9; P<0.001). ΔPa and ΔPd were closely related under conditions of peak (r=0.75; P<0.001) and stable hyperemia (r=0.83; P<0.001). On average, 56% (10.2 mm Hg) of the reduction in Pd was because of fall in Pa. FFR lesion classification changed in 9% using an FFR threshold of ≤0.80 and 5.2% with FFR threshold <0.75 when comparing Pd/Pa at peak and stable hyperemia. CONCLUSIONS: Intravenous adenosine results in variable changes in systemic blood pressure, which can lead to alterations in FFR lesion classification. Attention is required to ensure FFR is measured under conditions of stable hyperemia, although the FFR value at this point may be numerically higher.

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.

Diagnostic classification of the instantaneous wave-free ratio is equivalent to fractional flow reserve and is not improved with adenosine administration. Results of CLARIFY (Classification Accuracy of Pressure-Only Ratios Against Indices Using Flow Study).

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to determine if adenosine administration is required for the pressure-only assessment of coronary stenoses. BACKGROUND: The instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) is a vasodilator-free pressure-only measure of the hemodynamic severity of a coronary stenosis comparable to fractional flow reserve (FFR) in diagnostic categorization. In this study, we used hyperemic stenosis resistance (HSR), a combined pressure-and-flow index, as an arbiter to determine when iFR and FFR disagree which index is most representative of the hemodynamic significance of the stenosis. We then test whether administering adenosine significantly improves diagnostic performance of iFR. METHODS: In 51 vessels, intracoronary pressure and flow velocity was measured distal to the stenosis at rest and during adenosine-mediated hyperemia. The iFR (at rest and during adenosine administration [iFRa]), FFR, HSR, baseline, and hyperemic microvascular resistance were calculated using automated algorithms. RESULTS: When iFR and FFR disagreed (4 cases, or 7.7% of the study population), HSR agreed with iFR in 50% of cases and with FFR in 50% of cases. Differences in magnitude of microvascular resistance did not influence diagnostic categorization; iFR, iFRa, and FFR had equally good diagnostic agreement with HSR (receiver-operating characteristic area under the curve 0.93 iFR vs. 0.94 iFRa and 0.96 FFR, p = 0.48). CONCLUSIONS: iFR and FFR had equivalent agreement with classification of coronary stenosis severity by HSR. Further reduction in resistance by the administration of adenosine did not improve diagnostic categorization, indicating that iFR can be used as an adenosine-free alternative to FFR.