Is Coronary Physiology Assessment Valid in Special Circumstances?: Aortic Stenosis, Atrial Fibrillation, Left Ventricular Hypertrophy, and Other.

Fractional flow reserve (FFR) and nonhyperemic pressure ratios (NHPRs) provide an important clinical tool to evaluate the hemodynamic significance of coronary lesions. However, these indices have major limitations. As these indices are meant to be surrogates of coronary flow, clinical scenarios such as aortic stenosis (with increased end-systolic and end-diastolic pressures) or atrial fibrillation (with significant beat-to-beat cardiac output variability) can have significant effect on the accuracy and reliability of these hemodynamic indices. Here, we provide a comprehensive evaluation of the pitfalls, limitations, and strengths of FFR and NHPRs in common clinical scenarios paired with coronary artery disease.

Physiologic Lesion Assessment to Optimize Multivessel Disease.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Multivessel coronary artery disease, defined as significant stenosis in two or more major coronary arteries, is associated with high morbidity and mortality. The diagnosis and treatment of multivessel disease have evolved in the PCI era from solely a visual estimation of ischemic risk to a functional evaluation during angiography. This review summarizes the evidence and discusses the commonly used methods of multivessel coronary artery stenosis physiologic assessment. RECENT FINDINGS: While FFR remains the gold standard in coronary physiologic assessment, several pressure-wire-based non-hyperemic indices of functional stenosis have been developed and validated as well as wire-free angiographically derived quantitative flow ratio. Identifying and treating functionally significant coronary atherosclerotic lesions reduce symptoms and major adverse cardiovascular events. Coronary physiologic assessment in multivessel disease minimizes the observer bias in visual estimates of stenosis, changes clinical management, and improves patient outcomes.

1-Year Outcomes of Blinded Physiological Assessment of Residual Ischemia After Successful PCI: DEFINE PCI Trial.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to identify the post-percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) target value of instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) that would best discriminate clinical events at 1 year in the DEFINE PCI (Physiologic Assessment of Coronary Stenosis Following PCI) study. BACKGROUND: The impact of residual ischemia detected by iFR post-PCI on clinical and symptom-related outcomes is unknown. METHODS: Blinded iFR pull back was performed after successful stent implantation in 500 patients. The primary endpoint was the rate of residual ischemia, defined as iFR ≤0.89, after operator-assessed angiographically successful PCI. Secondary endpoints included clinical events at 1 year and change in Seattle Angina Questionnaire angina frequency (SAQ-AF) score during follow-up. RESULTS: As reported, 24.0% of patients had residual ischemia (iFR ≤0.89) after successful PCI, with 81.6% of cases attributable to angiographically inapparent focal lesions. Post-PCI iFR ≥0.95 (present in 182 cases [39%]) was associated with a significant reduction in the composite of cardiac death, spontaneous myocardial infarction, or clinically driven target vessel revascularization compared with post-PCI iFR <0.95 (1.8% vs 5.7%; P = 0.04). Baseline SAQ-AF score was 73.3 ± 22.8. For highly symptomatic patients (baseline SAQ-AF score ≤60), SAQ-AF score increased by ≥10 points more frequently in patients with versus without post-PCI iFR ≥0.95 (100.0% vs 88.5%; P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In DEFINE PCI, despite angiographically successful PCI, highly symptomatic patients at baseline without residual ischemia by post-PCI iFR had greater reductions in anginal symptoms at 1 year compared with patients with residual ischemia. Achieving post-PCI iFR ≥0.95 was also associated with improved 1-year event-free survival. (Physiologic Assessment of Coronary Stenosis Following PCI [DEFINE PCI]; NCT03084367).

Same-day discharge among patients undergoing elective PCI: Insights from the VA CART Program.

BACKGROUND: Available data suggest that same-day discharge (SDD) after elective percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is safe in select patients. Yet, little is known about contemporary adoption rates, safety, and costs in a universal health care system like the Veterans Affairs Health System. METHODS: Using data from the Veterans Affairs Clinical Assessment Reporting and Tracking Program linked with Health Economics Resource Center data, patients undergoing elective PCI for stable angina between October 1, 2007 and Sepetember 30, 2016, were stratified by SDD versus overnight stay. We examined trends of SDD, and using 2:1 propensity matching, we assessed 30-day rates of readmission, mortality, and total costs at 30 days. RESULTS: Of 21,261 PCIs from 67 sites, 728 were SDDs (3.9% of overall cohort). The rate of SDD increased from 1.6% in 2008 to 9.7% in 2016 (P < .001). SDD patients had lower rates of atrial fibrillation, peripheral arterial disease, and prior coronary artery bypass grafting and were treated at higher-volume centers. Thirty-day readmission and mortality did not differ significantly between the groups (readmission: 6.7% SDD vs 5.6% for overnight stay, P = .24; mortality: 0% vs. 0.07%, P = .99). The mean (SD) 30-day cost accrued by patients undergoing SDD was $23,656 ($15,480) versus $25,878 ($17,480) for an overnight stay. The accumulated median cost savings for SDD was $1503 (95% CI $738-$2,250). CONCLUSIONS: Veterans Affairs Health System has increasingly adopted SDD for elective PCI procedures, and this is associated with cost savings without an increase in readmission or mortality. Greater adoption has the potential to reduce costs without increasing adverse outcomes.

Blinded Physiological Assessment of Residual Ischemia After Successful Angiographic Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: The DEFINE PCI Study.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to evaluate the incidence and causes of an abnormal instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) after angiographically successful percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). BACKGROUND: Impaired coronary physiology as assessed by fractional flow reserve is present in some patients after PCI and is prognostically relevant. METHODS: DEFINE PCI (Physiologic Assessment of Coronary Stenosis Following PCI) was a multicenter, prospective, observational study in which a blinded iFR pull back was performed after angiographically successful PCI in 562 vessels in 500 patients. Inclusion criteria were angina with either multivessel or multilesion coronary artery disease with an abnormal baseline iFR. The primary endpoint of the study was the rate of residual ischemia after operator-assessed angiographically successful PCI, defined as an iFR <0.90. The causes of impaired iFR were categorized as stent related, untreated proximal or distal focal stenosis, or diffuse atherosclerosis. RESULTS: An average of 1.1 vessels per patient had abnormal baseline iFRs, with a mean value of 0.69 ± 0.22, which improved to 0.93 ± 0.07 post-PCI. Residual ischemia after angiographically successful PCI was present in 112 patients (24.0%), with a mean iFR in that population of 0.84 ± 0.06 (range 0.60 to 0.89). Among patients with impaired post-PCI iFRs, 81.6% had untreated focal stenoses that were angiographically inapparent, and 18.4% had diffuse disease. Among the focal lesions, 38.4% were located within the stent segment, while 31.5% were proximal and 30.1% were distal to the stent. Post-PCI vessel angiographic diameter stenosis was not a predictor of impaired post-procedural iFR. CONCLUSIONS: Blinded post-PCI physiological assessment detected residual ischemia in nearly 1 in 4 patients after coronary stenting despite an operator-determined angiographically successful result. Most cases of residual ischemia were due to inapparent focal lesions potentially amenable to treatment with additional PCI. (Physiologic Assessment of Coronary Stenosis Following PCI [DEFINE PCI]; NCT03084367).

Sex Differences in Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio or Fractional Flow Reserve-Guided Revascularization Strategy.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to evaluate sex differences in procedural characteristics and clinical outcomes of instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR)- and fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guided revascularization strategies. BACKGROUND: An iFR-guided strategy has shown a lower revascularization rate than an FFR-guided strategy, without differences in clinical outcomes. METHODS: This is a post hoc analysis of the DEFINE-FLAIR (Functional Lesion Assessment of Intermediate stenosis to guide Revascularization) study, in which 601 women and 1,891 men were randomized to iFR- or FFR-guided strategy. The primary endpoint was 1-year major adverse cardiac events (MACE), a composite of all-cause death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or unplanned revascularization. RESULTS: Among the entire population, women had a lower number of functionally significant lesions per patient (0.31 ± 0.51 vs. 0.43 ± 0.59; p < 0.001) and less frequently underwent revascularization than men (42.1% vs. 53.1%; p < 0.001). There was no difference in mean iFR value according to sex (0.91 ± 0.09 vs. 0.91 ± 0.10; p = 0.442). However, the mean FFR value was lower in men than in women (0.83 ± 0.09 vs. 0.85 ± 0.10; p = 0.001). In men, an FFR-guided strategy was associated with a higher rate of revascularization than an iFR-guided strategy (57.1% vs. 49.3%; p = 0.001), but this difference was not observed in women (41.4% vs. 42.6%; p = 0.757). There was no difference in MACE rates between iFR- and FFR-guided strategies in both women (5.4% vs. 5.6%, adjusted hazard ratio: 1.10; 95% confidence interval: 0.50 to 2.43; p = 0.805) and men (6.6% vs. 7.0%, adjusted hazard ratio: 0.98; 95% confidence interval: 0.66 to 1.46; p = 0.919). CONCLUSIONS: An FFR-guided strategy was associated with a higher rate of revascularization than iFR-guided strategy in men, but not in women. However, iFR- and FFR-guided strategies showed comparable clinical outcomes, regardless of sex. (Functional Lesion Assessment of Intermediate Stenosis to guide Revascularization [DEFINE-FLAIR]; NCT02053038).

Association of Physician Specialty With Long-Term Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Complication and Reoperations Rates.

Background Patients undergoing implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantations have high rates of long-term device-related complications and reoperations. Whether physician specialty training is associated with differences in long-term outcomes following ICD implantation is unclear. Methods and Results We linked data from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry ICD Registry with Medicare fee-for-service claims to identify physicians who performed ≥10 index ICDs from 2006 to 2009. We used data from the American Board of Medical Specialties to group the specialty of the implanting physician into mutually exclusive categories: electrophysiologists, interventional cardiologists, general cardiologists, thoracic surgeons, and other specialties. Primary outcomes were long-term device-related complications requiring reoperations or hospitalizations and reoperations for reasons other than complications. We compared the cumulative incidence rates and case-mix adjusted rates of long-term outcomes of index ICD implantations across physician specialties. Our analysis had a median follow-up of 47 months and included 107 966 index ICD implantations. Electrophysiologists had the lowest rates of incident long-term device-related complications (14.1%; interventional cardiologists, 15.3%; general cardiologists, 15.4%; thoracic surgeons, 16.4%; other specialists, 15.2%; P<0.001) and reoperations for reasons other than complications (electrophysiologists, 16.7%; interventional cardiologists, 17.0%; general cardiologists, 18.0%; thoracic surgeons, 18.4%; other specialists, 18.0%; P<0.001). Compared with patients whose ICDs were implanted by electrophysiologists, patients with implantations performed by nonelectrophysiologists were at higher risk of having long-term device-related complications (relative risk for interventional cardiologists: 1.16 [95% CI, 1.08-1.25]; general cardiologists: 1.13 [1.08-1.18]; thoracic surgeons: 1.20 [1.06-1.37]; all P<0.001, but not other specialists: 1.08 [0.99-1.17]; P=0.07). Compared to patients with implantations performed by electrophysiologists, patients with implantations performed by general cardiologists and thoracic surgeons were at higher risk of reoperation for noncomplication causes (relative risk for general cardiologists: 1.10 [1.05-1.15]; thoracic surgeons: 1.16 [1.00-1.33]; both P<0.05). Conclusions Patients with ICD implantations performed by electrophysiologists had the lowest risks of having long-term device-related complications and reoperations for noncomplication causes. Consideration of physician specialty before ICD implantation may represent an opportunity to minimize long-term adverse outcomes.

Bifurcation lesion assessment with advanced quantitative coronary angiography: A method still wanting.

Bifurcations are particularly prone to errors in visual estimation of diameter stenosis. Dedicated bifurcation QCA software confirmed only 26-27% of side branch lesions visually estimated to have >50% DS. Validation against physiologic measures is necessary to determine whether bifurcation QCA software has value.

Radial haemostasis is facilitated with a potassium ferrate haemostatic patch: the Statseal with TR Band assessment trial (STAT).

AIMS: Haemostasis is a limiting factor for discharge after uncomplicated transradial procedures. The purpose of this study was to determine whether a potassium ferrate haemostatic patch (PFHP) could serve as an adjunct to the air-bladder TR Band (TRB) to facilitate implementation of a rapid deflation protocol. METHODS AND RESULTS: This was a prospective multicentre randomised controlled trial comparing radial haemostatic protocols. Deflation of the TRB was attempted at 40 minutes with PFHP and at 120 minutes without the PFHP. The primary outcome was time to full deflation of the TRB with haemostasis. At four US sites, 180 patients were enrolled after receiving a minimum of 5,000 units of unfractionated heparin or bivalirudin. Interventions comprised 30% of procedures. Successful TRB deflation occurred at 43±14 minutes with PFHP and 160±43 minutes without PFHP (p<0.001). Minor haematomas occurred in nine (10.3%) of the TRB patients and 16 (17.2%) of the PFHP patients (p=0.20). Radial artery occlusion occurred in 2% of patients in the PFHP group (p=NS). Outpatients randomised to PFHP were discharged 51±83.5 minutes earlier than control. CONCLUSIONS: The PFHP haemostatic patch facilitated early deflation of the TRB with a non-significant increase in forearm haematomas. Use of the PFHP may improve patient throughput and allow earlier discharge following transradial procedures.

Length of stay following percutaneous coronary intervention: An expert consensus document update from the society for cardiovascular angiography and interventions.

Since the publication of the 2009 SCAI Expert Consensus Document on Length of Stay Following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), advances in vascular access techniques, stent technology, and antiplatelet pharmacology have facilitated changes in discharge patterns following PCI. Additional clinical studies have demonstrated the safety of early and same day discharge in selected patients with uncomplicated PCI, while reimbursement policies have discouraged unnecessary hospitalization. This consensus update: (1) clarifies clinical and reimbursement definitions of discharge strategies, (2) reviews the technological advances and literature supporting reduced hospitalization duration and risk assessment, and (3) describes changes to the consensus recommendations on length of stay following PCI (Supporting Information Table S1). These recommendations are intended to support reasonable clinical decision making regarding postprocedure length of stay for a broad spectrum of patients undergoing PCI, rather than prescribing a specific period of observation for individual patients.

The occult hemodynamically significant left main stenosis in the asymptomatic patient: Reconciling the visual-functional mismatch - A case report and review of screening appropriateness and assessment of left main in patient with multi-vessel CAD.

We present a 40 year old asymptomatic man with mild left main artery narrowing who demonstrated extreme discordance between symptom presentation and ischemic burden i.e. visual (angiographic) and ischemic (functional) mismatch. The use of an appropriately selected screening stress test can lead to an appropriate decision for revascularization, supported by landmark risk assessment documents and revascularization trials.

ACIST-FFR Study (Assessment of Catheter-Based Interrogation and Standard Techniques for Fractional Flow Reserve Measurement).

BACKGROUND: Measurement of fractional flow reserve (FFR) to guide coronary revascularization lags despite robust supportive data, partly because of the handling characteristics of traditional coronary pressure wires. An optical pressure-monitoring microcatheter, which can be advanced over a traditional coronary guidewire, facilitates FFR assessment but may underestimate pressure wire-derived FFR. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this prospective, multicenter trial, 169 patients underwent FFR assessment with a pressure wire alone and with a pressure microcatheter over the pressure wire. An independent core laboratory performed quantitative coronary angiography and evaluated all pressure tracings. The primary end point was the bias or difference between the microcatheter FFR and the pressure wire FFR, as assessed by Bland-Altman analysis. The mean difference between the microcatheter and the pressure wire-derived FFR values was -0.022 (95% confidence interval, -0.029 to -0.015). On multivariable analysis, reference vessel diameter (P=0.027) and lesion length (P=0.044) were independent predictors of bias between the 2 FFR measurements. When the microcatheter FFR was added to this model, it was the only independent predictor of bias (P<0.001). The mean FFR value from the microcatheter was significantly lower than from the pressure wire (0.81 versus 0.83; P<0.001). In 3% of cases (95% confidence interval, 1.3%-6.7%), there was clinically meaningful diagnostic discordance, with the FFR from the pressure wire >0.80 and that from the microcatheter <0.75. These findings were similar when including all 210 patients with site-reported paired FFR data. CONCLUSIONS: An optical, pressure-monitoring microcatheter measures lower FFR compared with a pressure wire, but the diagnostic impact appears to be minimal in most cases. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT02577484.

Nonangiographic assessment of coronary artery disease: a practical approach to optical coherence tomography and fractional flow reserve.

In an era of increased scrutiny of the appropriateness and safety of revascularization, interventional cardiologists must evolve by adding key tools to their armamentarium. This review highlights the utility of optical coherence tomography and fractional flow reserve in the catheterization lab and provides a practical guide for using these technologies during coronary intervention in various lesion subsets. We propose that fractional flow reserve informs the decision to intervene and optical coherence tomography guides the optimization of the outcome.