Practical Application of Coronary Physiologic Assessment: Asia-Pacific Expert Consensus Document: Part 1.

Coronary physiologic assessment is performed to measure coronary pressure, flow, and resistance or their surrogates to enable the selection of appropriate management strategy and its optimization for patients with coronary artery disease. The value of physiologic assessment is supported by a large body of evidence that has led to major recommendations in clinical practice guidelines. This expert consensus document aims to convey practical and balanced recommendations and future perspectives for coronary physiologic assessment for physicians and patients in the Asia-Pacific region based on updated information in the field that including both wire- and image-based physiologic assessment. This is Part 1 of the whole consensus document, which describes the general concept of coronary physiology, as well as practical information on the clinical application of physiologic indices and novel image-based physiologic assessment.

Practical Application of Coronary Physiologic Assessment: Asia-Pacific Expert Consensus Document: Part 2.

Coronary physiologic assessment is performed to measure coronary pressure, flow, and resistance or their surrogates to enable the selection of appropriate management strategy and its optimization for patients with coronary artery disease. The value of physiologic assessment is supported by a large body of clinical data that has led to major recommendations in all practice guidelines. This expert consensus document aims to convey practical and balanced recommendations and future perspectives for coronary physiologic assessment for physicians and patients in the Asia-Pacific region, based on updated information in the field that includes both wire- and image-based physiologic assessment. This is Part 2 of the whole consensus document, which provides theoretical and practical information on physiologic indexes for specific clinical conditions and patient statuses.

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.

Assessment of clinical, electrocardiographic, and physiological relevance of diagonal branch in left anterior descending coronary artery bifurcation lesions.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to investigate the clinical, electrocardiographic, and physiological relevance of main and side branches in coronary bifurcation lesions. BACKGROUND: Discrepancy exists between stenosis severity and clinical outcomes in bifurcation lesions. However, its mechanism has not been fully evaluated yet. METHODS: Sixty-five patients with left anterior descending coronary artery (LAD) bifurcation lesions were prospectively enrolled. Chest pain and 12-lead electrocardiogram were assessed after 1-min occlusion of coronary flow and coronary wedge pressure (Pw) was measured using a pressure wire. RESULTS: ST-segment elevation was more frequent during LAD occlusion (92%) than during diagonal branch occlusion (37%) (p < 0.001). Pain score was also higher with the occlusion of LAD than with the diagonal branch (p < 0.001). However, both Pw and Pw/aortic pressure (Pa) were lower in the LAD than in diagonal branches (Pw: 21.0 ± 6.5 vs. 26.7 ± 9.4, p < 0.0001; Pw/Pa: 0.22 ± 0.07 vs. 0.27 ± 0.08, p = 0.001). The corrected QT interval was prolonged with LAD occlusion (435.0 ± 39.6 ms to 454.0 ± 45.4 ms, p < 0.0001) but not with diagonal branch occlusion. There was no difference in vessel size between the diagonal branches with and without ST-segment elevation during occlusion. Positive and negative predictive values of vessel size (≥2.5 mm) to determine the presence of ST-segment elevation were 48% and 72%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Diagonal branch occlusion caused fewer anginas, less electrocardiogram change, less arrhythmogenic potential, and higher Pw than did a LAD occlusion. These differences seem to be the main mechanism explaining why aggressive treatment for side branches has not translated into clinical benefit in coronary bifurcation lesions. (Comparison Between Main Branch and Side Branch Vessels; NCT01046409).

Assessment of intraventricular systolic asynchrony in patients with atrial fibrillation using triplane tissue Doppler imaging.

BACKGROUND: Triplane tissue Doppler imaging (TDI) makes it possible to simultaneously obtain three apical view images and to measure the dyssynchrony index (DS) for 12 segments in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). We evaluated the feasibility of using triplane TDI to assess intraventricular asynchrony in AF. METHODS: In 50 patients with AF, triplane TDI was used for the analysis of myocardial velocity curves of 12 (six basal and six mid) left ventricular (LV) segments by apical two-, three-, and four-chamber views. Time to peak systolic velocity (Ts) was measured, and DS was calculated as the standard deviation (SD) of Ts over 12 segments. The DS(avg) was defined as the average of DS of eight consecutive cycles. To assess the cyclic variability of DS, the coefficient of variation of DS (CoV(DS)) was calculated as the SD of DS for eight cycles divided by DS(avg) [SD(DS)/DS(avg)]. CoV(RR), representing the variability of RR intervals, was defined as [SD(RR)/RR(avg)]. Patients with a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of 45% or more were classified as group A, and patients with an LVEF less than 45% as were classified as group B. RESULTS: The mean LVEF was 47% +/- 12%. Group B showed larger LV volume and lower sphericity index compared with group A. Intraobserver and interobserver variability of DS(avg) were 6% and 9%, respectively. More severe dyssynchrony was observed in group B (DS(avg); 23.5 +/- 8.5 ms in group B vs. 17.7 +/- 6.1 ms in group A, P = .008). DS(avg) was not related to RR(avg) or CoV(RR). DS(avg) negatively correlated with ejection fraction (r = -0.404, P = .004) and sphericity index (r = -0.317, P = .025) and showed positive correlation with LV volume. CONCLUSION: Analysis of asynchrony by triplane TDI was feasible in patients with AF. DS(avg) correlated with echocardiographic parameters of systolic function.