Fractional flow reserve use in coronary artery revascularization: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is recommended in revascularization guidelines for intermediate lesions. However, recent studies comparing FFR-guided PCI with non-physiology-guided revascularization have reported conflicting results. PubMed and Embase were searched for studies comparing FFR-guided PCI with non-physiology-guided revascularization strategies (angiography-guided, intracoronary imaging-guided, coronary artery bypass grafting). Data were pooled by meta-analysis using random-effects model. 26 studies enrolling 78,897 patients were included. FFR-guided PCI as compared to non-physiology-guided coronary revascularization had lower risk of all-cause mortality (odds ratio [OR] 0.79 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.64-0.99, I2 = 53%) and myocardial infarction (MI) (OR 0.74 95% CI 0.59-0.93, I2 = 44.7%). However, no differences between groups were found in terms of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) (OR 0.86 95% CI 0.72-1.03, I2 = 72.3%) and repeat revascularization (OR 1 95% CI 0.82-1.20, I2 = 43.2%). Among patients with coronary artery disease (CAD), FFR-guided PCI as compared to non-physiology-guided revascularization was associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality and MI.

Respiration-related variations in Pd/Pa ratio and fractional flow reserve in resting conditions and during intravenous adenosine administration.

AIMS: We evaluated the occurrence and physiology of respiration-related beat-to-beat variations in resting Pd/Pa and FFR during intravenous adenosine administration, and its impact on clinical decision-making. METHODS AND RESULTS: Coronary pressure tracings in rest and at plateau hyperemia were analyzed in a total of 39 stenosis from 37 patients, and respiratory rate was calculated with ECG-derived respiration (EDR) in 26 stenoses from 26 patients. Beat-to-beat variations in FFR occurred in a cyclical fashion and were strongly correlated with respiratory rate (R2  = 0.757, p < 0.001). There was no correlation between respiratory rate and variations in resting Pd/Pa. When single-beat averages were used to calculate FFR, mean ΔFFR was 0.04 ± 0.02. With averaging of FFR over three or five cardiac cycles, mean ΔFFR decreased to 0.02 ± 0.02, and 0.01 ± 0.01, respectively. Using a FFR ≤ 0.80 threshold, stenosis classification changed in 20.5% (8/39), 12.8% (5/39) and 5.1% (2/39) for single-beat, three-beat and five-beat averaged FFR. The impact of respiration was more pronounced in patients with pulmonary disease (ΔFFR 0.05 ± 0.02 vs 0.03 ± 0.02, p = 0.021). CONCLUSION: Beat-to-beat variations in FFR during plateau hyperemia related to respiration are common, of clinically relevant magnitude, and frequently lead FFR to cross treatment thresholds. A five-beat averaged FFR, overcomes clinically relevant impact of FFR variation.

Age and functional relevance of coronary stenosis: a post hoc analysis of the ADVISE II trial.

BACKGROUND: The influence of age-dependent changes on fractional flow reserve (FFR) or instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) and the response to pharmacological hyperaemia has not been investigated. AIMS: We investigated the impact of age on these indices. METHODS: This is a post hoc analysis of the ADVISE II trial, including a total of 690 pressure recordings (in 591 patients). Age-dependent correlations with FFR and iFR were calculated and adjusted for stenosis severity. Patients were stratified into three age terciles. The hyperaemic response to adenosine, calculated as the difference between resting and hyperaemic pressure ratios, and the prevalence of FFR-iFR discordance were assessed. RESULTS: Age correlated positively with FFR (r=0.08, 95% CI: 0.01 to 0.15, p=0.015), but not with iFR (r=-0.03, 95% CI: -0.11 to 0.04, p=0.411). The hyperaemic response to adenosine decreased with patient age (0.12±0.07, 0.11±0.06, 0.09±0.05, for the 1st [33-58 years], 2nd [59-69 years] and 3rd [70-94 years] age tertiles, respectively, p<0.001) and showed significant correlation with age (r=-0.14, 95% CI: -0.21 to -0.06, p<0.001). The proportion of patients with FFR ≤0.80+iFR >0.89 discordance doubled in the first age tercile (14.1% vs 7.1% vs 7.0%, p=0.005). CONCLUSIONS: The hyperaemic response of the microcirculation to adenosine administration is age dependent. FFR values increase with patient age, while iFR values remain constant across the age spectrum. These findings contribute to explaining differences observed in functional stenosis classification with hyperaemic and non-hyperaemic coronary indices.

Individual Lesion-Level Meta-Analysis Comparing Various Doses of Intracoronary Bolus Injection of Adenosine With Intravenous Administration of Adenosine for Fractional Flow Reserve Assessment.

BACKGROUND: Intravenous infusion of adenosine is considered standard practice for fractional flow reserve (FFR) assessment but is associated with adverse side-effects and is time-consuming. Intracoronary bolus injection of adenosine is better tolerated by patients, cheaper, and less time-consuming. However, current literature remains fragmented and modestly sized regarding the equivalence of intracoronary versus intravenous adenosine. We aim to investigate the relationship between intracoronary adenosine and intravenous adenosine to determine FFR. METHODS: We performed a lesion-level meta-analysis to compare intracoronary adenosine with intravenous adenosine (140 µg/kg per minute) for FFR assessment. The search was conducted in accordance to the Preferred Reporting for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis statement. Lesion-level data were obtained by contacting the respective authors or by digitization of scatterplots using custom-made software. Intracoronary adenosine dose was defined as; low: <40 µg, intermediate: 40 to 99 µg, and high: ≥100 µg. RESULTS: We collected 1972 FFR measurements (1413 lesions) comparing intracoronary with intravenous adenosine from 16 studies. There was a strong correlation (correlation coefficient =0.915; P<0.001) between intracoronary-FFR and intravenous-FFR. Mean FFR was 0.81±0.11 for intracoronary adenosine and 0.81±0.11 for intravenous adenosine (P<0.001). We documented a nonclinically relevant mean difference of 0.006 (limits of agreement: -0.066 to 0.078) between the methods. When stratified by the intracoronary adenosine dose, mean differences between intracoronary and intravenous-FFR amounted to 0.004, 0.011, or 0.000 FFR units for low-dose, intermediate-dose, and high-dose intracoronary adenosine, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The present study documents clinically irrelevant differences in FFR values obtained with intracoronary versus intravenous adenosine. Intracoronary adenosine hence confers a practical and patient-friendly alternative for intravenous adenosine for FFR assessment.

Safety of intermediate left main stenosis revascularization deferral based on fractional flow reserve and intravascular ultrasound: A systematic review and meta-regression including 908 deferred left main stenosis from 12 studies.

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines recommend intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) or fractional flow reserve (FFR) to decide upon ambiguous left main (LM) disease. However, no study has compared the safety of LM revascularization deferral based on FFR or IVUS. METHODS: MEDLINE/PubMed was systematically screened for studies reporting on deferred treatment of angiographically ambiguous LM based upon FFR or IVUS evaluation. Baseline, angiographic and outcome data were appraised and pooled separately for each strategy according to random-effect models with inverse-variance weighting. RESULTS: A total of 908 LM stenoses from 7 FFR and 5 IVUS studies were included with median follow-up of 29.0 and 31.5 months respectively. Per year of follow-up occurrence of overall MACE were 5.1% in FFR group and 6.4% in IVUS group while death, myocardial infarction, LM revascularization were respectively 2.6%, 1.5% and 1.8% vs. 3.0%, 0.5% and 2.2%. Meta-regression analysis suggested the influence of a distal LM stenosis on MACE in FFR group (ß = 0.06, p = 0.01) and age in IVUS group (ß = 0.4, p = 0.001). In individual studies several independent predictors of MACE were identified including use of lower doses of intracoronary adenosine (OR 1.39, p = 0.04) in FFR group and plaque burden (OR 1.34, p = 0.025), number of other diseased vessels (OR 1.39, p = 0.04) and any untreated stenosis (OR 3.80; p = 0.037) in IVUS- studies. CONCLUSIONS: Deferring LM intermediate stenosis on the basis of FFR or IVUS showed an acceptable and similar risk of events in a mid-term follow-up. Conversely, several different variables related to each technique showed an interaction on outcome.

Identification of capillary rarefaction using intracoronary wave intensity analysis with resultant prognostic implications for cardiac allograft patients.

Aims: Techniques for identifying specific microcirculatory structural changes are desirable. As such, capillary rarefaction constitutes one of the earliest changes of cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV) in cardiac allograft recipients, but its identification with coronary flow reserve (CFR) or intracoronary resistance measurements is hampered because of non-selective interrogation of the capillary bed. We therefore investigated the potential of wave intensity analysis (WIA) to assess capillary rarefaction and thereby predict CAV. Methods and results: Fifty-two allograft patients with unobstructed coronary arteries and normal left ventricular (LV) function were assessed. Adequate aortic pressure and left anterior descending artery flow measurements at rest and with intracoronary adenosine were obtained in 46 of which 2 were lost to follow-up. In a subgroup of 15 patients, simultaneous RV biopsies were obtained and analysed for capillary density. Patients were followed up with 1-3 yearly screening angiography. A significant relationship with capillary density was noted with CFR (r = 0.52, P = 0.048) and the backward decompression wave (BDW) (r = -0.65, P < 0.01). Over a mean follow-up of 9.3 ± 5.2 years patients with a smaller BDW had an increased risk of developing angiographic CAV (hazard ratio 2.89, 95% CI 1.12-7.39; P = 0.03). Additionally, the index BDW was lower in those who went on to have a clinical CAV-events (P = 0.04) as well as more severe disease (P = 0.01). Conclusions: Within cardiac transplant patients, WIA is able to quantify the earliest histological changes of CAV and can predict clinical and angiographic outcomes. This proof-of-concept for WIA also lends weight to its use in the assessment of other disease processes in which capillary rarefaction is involved.

What is the optimal treatment for symptomatic patients with isolated coronary myocardial bridge? A systematic review and pooled analysis.

BACKGROUND: Myocardial bridging is a common coronary anomaly, with few severe adverse events but a relevant symptom burden. Myocardial bridging treatment, however, remains uncertain because of the lack of randomized trials. MATERIAL: MEDLINE/PubMed was systematically screened for studies reporting on isolated myocardial bridging diagnosed at coronary angiography or with coronary computed tomography in patients admitted for suspected angina or with an acute coronary syndrome. Baseline, treatment and outcome data were appraised and pooled according to treatment (medical therapy, bypass surgery/myotomy or stenting). RESULTS: A total of 899 patients in 18 studies were included with a low prevalence of traditional risk factors, especially diabetes (15.6%, interquartile range 2.5-21.5). After a median of 31.0 months (interquartile range 12.4-37.1), major cardiovascular events (composite of death, myocardial infarction or target vessel revascularization) occurred in only 3.4% of the study patients and 78.7% [70.5-86.9; 95% confidence intervals (CI)] were managed conservatively and free of symptoms. When an invasive strategy was planned, freedom from angina was higher in patients treated with surgery [84.5% (78.4-90.7; 95% CI)] than in those treated with stenting [54.7% (38.9-70.6; 95% CI)]. Patients in the stenting group experienced a high incidence of major cardiovascular events related to target vessel revascularization [40.07% (19.83-60.32; 95% CI)]. Meta-regression showed that patients treated with beta-blockers or with a history of hypertension were more likely to remain free from angina (B -0.6, P = 0.013; B -0.66, P = 0.006). CONCLUSION: Patients with symptomatic isolated myocardial bridging generally have a good long-term prognosis. Pharmacological treatment alone, especially with beta-blockers, is able to improve angina in most cases. Surgical treatment appears to be more effective than stenting in nonresponders.

PRotective Effect on the coronary microcirculation of patients with DIabetes by Clopidogrel or Ticagrelor (PREDICT): study rationale and design. A randomized multicenter clinical trial using intracoronary multimodal physiology.

BACKGROUND: In diabetic patients a predisposed coronary microcirculation along with a higher risk of distal particulate embolization during primary percutaneous intervention (PCI) increases the risk of peri-procedural microcirculatory damage. However, new antiplatelet agents, in particular Ticagrelor, may protect the microcirculation through its adenosine-mediated vasodilatory effects. METHODS: PREDICT is an original, prospective, randomized, multicenter controlled study designed to investigate the protective effect of Ticagrelor on the microcirculation during PCI in patient with diabetes mellitus type 2 or pre-diabetic status. The primary endpoints of this study aim to test (i) the decrease in microcirculatory resistance with antiplatelet therapy (Ticagrelor > Clopidogrel; mechanistic effect) and (ii) the relative microcirculatory protection of Ticagrelor compared to Clopidogrel during PCI (Ticagrelor < Clopidogrel; protective effect). CONCLUSIONS: PREDICT will be the first multicentre clinical trial to test the adenosine-mediated vasodilatory effect of Ticagrelor on the microcirculation during PCI in diabetic patients. The results will provide important insights into the prospective beneficial effect of this drug in preventing microvascular impairment related to PCI ( http://www.clinicaltrials.gov No. NCT02698618).

Rationale and design of the SYNTAX II trial evaluating the short to long-term outcomes of state-of-the-art percutaneous coronary revascularisation in patients with de novo three-vessel disease.

AIMS: The applicability of the results of the SYNTAX trial comparing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) using first-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) with coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery for the treatment of patients with complex coronary artery disease (CAD) has been challenged by recent major technical and procedural developments in coronary revascularisation. Functional assessment of coronary lesions has contributed to marked improvements in both safety and efficacy of DES implantation. In addition, the recent development of the SYNTAX score II, a clinical tool based on anatomical and clinical factors, allows individualised objective decision making regarding the optimal revascularisation modality in patients with complex CAD. The ongoing SYNTAX II trial is currently evaluating the effectiveness of the clinical and technological advances in the treatment of patients with complex (de novo three-vessel) CAD. METHODS AND RESULTS: The SYNTAX II trial is a multicentre, all-comers, open-label, single-arm trial aiming to recruit 450 patients with de novo three-vessel CAD in approximately 25 European interventional cardiology centres. All patients will be selected and treated following the SYNTAX II strategy, which includes: a) establishing the appropriateness of revascularisation utilising the SYNTAX score II as a clinical tool to allow objective decision making by the Heart Team, b) ischaemia-driven revascularisation based on functional intracoronary assessment, c) implantation of the new-generation everolimus-eluting platinum chromium coronary stent with thin struts and abluminal bioabsorbable polymer coating to promote rapid vessel healing, d) intravascular ultrasound-guided DES implantation, and e) treatment at centres with expertise in CTO recanalisation. The primary endpoint is a composite of the major adverse cardiac and cerebral events (MACCE) rate at one-year follow-up compared to the historical PCI arm of the SYNTAX trial. An exploratory endpoint will be MACCE at five-year follow-up compared to the historical surgical arm of the SYNTAX trial. CONCLUSIONS: The SYNTAX II trial will provide valuable information on outcomes of state-of-the-art PCI for the contemporary management of complex (de novo three-vessel) CAD. SYNTAX II will be of critical value in the design of future trials in this arena.

Fractional flow reserve and minimum Pd/Pa ratio during intravenous adenosine infusion: very similar but not always the same.

AIMS: Maximum and stable hyperaemia are critical prerequisites for the accurate measurement of fractional flow reserve (FFR). However, in some patients in whom hyperaemia is induced through a central vein (IV) the minimum distal coronary pressure to aortic pressure ratio (Pd/Pa ratio) develops before the stabilisation of hyperaemia. We sought to describe the prevalence, magnitude and clinical implications of this phenomenon. METHODS AND RESULTS: The FFR tracing archive of a single institution was reviewed and a total of 104 high-quality IV-FFR recordings from 90 patients were identified. Whenever the minimum Pd/Pa ratio was found before the onset of stable hyperaemia, a search for the lowest Pd/Pa ratio within the steady-state hyperaemic plateau was performed and labelled as FFRstable. Whilst in most cases the minimum Pd/Pa ratio developed during stable hyperaemia, in 19 cases (prevalence of 18.3% [95% CI: 12.0% to 26.8%]) this value was found before the stabilisation of the hyperaemic state. In such cases, the minimum Pd/Pa ratio stabilised later at a higher level (0.77±0.09 vs. 0.81±0.08, p<0.001) (mean difference, 0.03±0.02, range, 0.01 to 0.10). In terms of dichotomous classification of stenosis severity and if FFRstable had been used to decide on revascularisation, reclassification would have occurred in three (2.9%) cases, all presenting a minimum Pd/Pa ratio ≤0.80 with FFRstable >0.80. CONCLUSIONS: During IV adenosine infusion, the minimum Pd/Pa ratio occurs before the stabilisation of hyperaemia in a significant proportion of cases. While the overall difference between the minimum Pd/Pa ratio and its FFRstable counterpart is small, reclassification of stenosis severity might occur, if choosing between the minimum and stable values of FFR within the same trace.

Prospective Assessment of the Diagnostic Accuracy of Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio to Assess Coronary Stenosis Relevance: Results of ADVISE II International, Multicenter Study (ADenosine Vasodilator Independent Stenosis Evaluation II).

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to assess the diagnostic accuracy of the instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) to characterize, outside of a pre-specified range of values, stenosis severity, as defined by fractional flow reserve (FFR) ≤0.80, in a prospective, independent, controlled, core laboratory-based environment. BACKGROUND: Studies with methodological heterogeneity have reported some discrepancies in the classification agreement between iFR and FFR. The ADVISE II (ADenosine Vasodilator Independent Stenosis Evaluation II) study was designed to overcome limitations of previous iFR versus FFR comparisons. METHODS: A total of 919 intermediate coronary stenoses were investigated during baseline and hyperemia. From these, 690 pressure recordings (n = 598 patients) met core laboratory physiology criteria and are included in this report. RESULTS: The pre-specified iFR cut-off of 0.89 was optimal for the study and correctly classified 82.5% of the stenoses, with a sensitivity of 73.0% and specificity of 87.8% (C statistic: 0.90 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.88 to 0.92, p < 0.001]). The proportion of stenoses properly classified by iFR outside of the pre-specified treatment (≤0.85) and deferral (≥0.94) values was 91.6% (95% CI: 88.8% to 93.9%). When combined with FFR use within these cut-offs, the percent of stenoses properly classified by such a pre-specified hybrid iFR-FFR approach was 94.2% (95% CI: 92.2% to 95.8%). The hybrid iFR-FFR approach obviated vasodilators from 65.1% (95% CI: 61.1% to 68.9%) of patients and 69.1% (95% CI: 65.5% to 72.6%) of stenoses. CONCLUSIONS: The ADVISE II study supports, on the basis rigorous methodology, the diagnostic value of iFR in establishing the functional significance of coronary stenoses, and highlights its complementariness with FFR when used in a hybrid iFR-FFR approach. (ADenosine Vasodilator Independent Stenosis Evaluation II-ADVISE II; NCT01740895).

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.

Impact of hyperaemic microvascular resistance on fractional flow reserve measurements in patients with stable coronary artery disease: insights from combined stenosis and microvascular resistance assessment.

BACKGROUND: Fractional flow reserve (FFR) aims to identify the extent of epicardial disease, but may be obscured by involvement of the coronary microvasculature. We documented the impact of hyperaemic stenosis resistance (HSR) and hyperaemic microvascular resistance (HMR) on FFR, and its relationship with myocardial ischaemia in patients with stable coronary artery disease. METHODS AND RESULTS: We evaluated 255 coronary arteries with stenoses of intermediate severity by means of intracoronary pressure and flow measurements to determine FFR, HSR and HMR. Myocardial perfusion scintigraphy (MPS) was performed to identify inducible myocardial ischaemia. In 178 patients, HMR was additionally determined in a reference coronary artery. Target vessel HMR was stratified according to reference vessel HMR tertiles. The diagnostic OR for inducible ischaemia on MPS of a positive compared with a negative FFR was significantly higher only in the presence of a high HMR (at the 0.75 and 0.80 FFR cut-off). Among stenoses with a positive FFR, the prevalence of ischaemia was significantly higher when HMR was high despite equivalent FFR across the HMR groups. This was paralleled by a concomitant significant increase in HSR with increasing HMR across groups. The relation between FFR and HSR (r(2)=0.54, p<0.001) was modulated by the magnitude of HMR, and improved substantially after adjustment for HMR (adjusted-r(2)=0.73, p<0.001), where, for epicardial disease of equivalent severity, FFR increased with increasing HMR. CONCLUSIONS: Identification of epicardial disease severity by FFR is partly obscured by the microvascular resistance, which illustrates the necessity of combined pressure and flow measurements in daily practice.

Low coronary microcirculatory resistance associated with profound hypotension during intravenous adenosine infusion: implications for the functional assessment of coronary stenoses.

BACKGROUND: Intravenous adenosine infusion produces coronary and systemic vasodilatation, generally leading to systemic hypotension. However, adenosine-induced hypotension during stable hyperemia is heterogeneous, and its relevance to coronary stenoses assessment with fractional flow reserve (FFR) remains largely unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS: FFR, coronary flow reserve, and index of microcirculatory resistance were measured in 93 stenosed arteries (79 patients). Clinical and intracoronary measurements were analyzed among tertiles of the percentage degree of adenosine-induced hypotension, defined as follows: %ΔP(a)=-[100-(hyperemic aortic pressure×100/baseline aortic pressure)]. Overall, %ΔP(a) was -13.6±12.0%. Body mass index was associated with %ΔP(a) (r=0.258; P=0.025) and obesity, an independent predictor of profound adenosine-induced hypotension (tertile 3 of %ΔP(a); odds ratio, 3.95 [95% confidence interval, 1.48-10.54]; P=0.006). %ΔP(a) was associated with index of microcirculatory resistance (ρ=0.311; P=0.002), coronary flow reserve (r=-0.246; P=0.017), and marginally with FFR (r=0.203; P=0.051). However, index of microcirculatory resistance (ß=0.003; P<0.001) and not %ΔP(a) (ß=-0.001; P=0.564) was a predictor of FFR. Compared with tertiles 1 and 2 of %ΔP(a) (n=62 [66.6%]), stenoses assessed during profound adenosine-induced hypotension (n=31 [33.3%]) had lower index of microcirculatory resistance (12.4 [8.6-22.7] versus 20 [15.8-35.5]; P=0.001) and FFR values (0.77±0.13 versus 0.83±0.12; P=0.021), as well as a nonsignificant increase in coronary flow reserve (2.5±1.1 versus 2.2±0.87; P=0.170). CONCLUSIONS: The modification of systemic blood pressure during intravenous adenosine infusion is related to hyperemic microcirculatory resistance in the heart. Profound adenosine-induced hypotension is associated with obesity, lower coronary microcirculatory resistance, and lower FFR values.

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.

Hybrid iFR-FFR decision-making strategy: implications for enhancing universal adoption of physiology-guided coronary revascularisation.

AIMS: Adoption of fractional flow reserve (FFR) remains low (6-8%), partly because of the time, cost and potential inconvenience associated with vasodilator administration. The instantaneous wave-Free Ratio (iFR) is a pressure-only index of stenosis severity calculated without vasodilator drugs. Before outcome trials test iFR as a sole guide to revascularisation, we evaluate the merits of a hybrid iFR-FFR decision-making strategy for universal physiological assessment. METHODS AND RESULTS: Coronary pressure traces from 577 stenoses were analysed. iFR was calculated as the ratio between Pd and Pa in the resting diastolic wave-free window. A hybrid iFR-FFR strategy was evaluated, by allowing iFR to defer some stenoses (where negative predictive value is high) and treat others (where positive predictive value is high), with adenosine being given only to patients with iFR in between those values. For the most recent fixed FFR cut-off (0.8), an iFR of <0.86 could be used to confirm treatment (PPV of 92%), whilst an iFR value of >0.93 could be used to defer revascularisation (NPV of 91%). Limiting vasodilator drugs to cases with iFR values between 0.86 to 0.93 would obviate the need for vasodilator drugs in 57% of patients, whilst maintaining 95% agreement with an FFR-only strategy. If the 0.75-0.8 FFR grey zone is accounted for, vasodilator drug requirement would decrease by 76%. CONCLUSION: A hybrid iFR-FFR decision-making strategy for revascularisation could increase adoption of physiology-guided PCI, by more than halving the need for vasodilator administration, whilst maintaining high classification agreement with an FFR-only strategy.

Extremely rare single right coronary artery: multidetector computed tomography findings / Arteria coronaria derecha única muy infrecuente: hallazgos por tomografía computada multidetector

Coronary anomalies are rare, with a reported prevalence of 1.3% among patients who undergo coronary angiography. The great majority of coronary artery anomalies are incidental findings and are not clinically significant, but in some cases, may be responsible for angina, syncope, arrhythmias or even sudden death. In the following case, we describe coronary CT angiography findings of one of the rarest coronary anomalies. Lipton R-I type single right coronary artery has only been previously reported in very few occasions and has been seen in only 0.0007% of the population.

Las anomalías congénitas de las arterias coronarias son raras, con una prevalencia estimada de 1.3% en pacientes sometidos a angiografía coronaria. La gran mayoría de estas anomalías no son clínicamente significativas, aunque en algunos casos, pueden producir angina, síncope, arritmias e incluso muerte súbita. En el siguiente caso, describimos mediante tomografía computarizada multicorte, una de las anomalías congénitas de las arterias coronarias más raras. La arteria coronaria derecha única tipo R-I de Lipton, de la que sólo se han reportado muy pocos casos y su prevalencia se estima en 0.0007%.