Comparison of bolus versus continuous thermodilution derived indices of microvascular dysfunction in revascularized coronary syndromes.

Background: The assessment of coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMD) using invasive methods is a field of growing interest, however the preferred method remains debated. Bolus and continuous thermodilution are commonly used methods, but weak agreement has been observed in patients with angina with non-obstructive coronary arteries (ANOCA). This study examined their agreement in revascularized acute coronary syndromes (ACS) and chronic coronary syndromes (CCS) patients. Objective: To compare bolus thermodilution and continuous thermodilution indices of CMD in revascularized ACS and CCS patients and assess their diagnostic agreement at pre-defined cut-off points. Methods: Patients from two centers underwent paired bolus and continuous thermodilution assessments after revascularization. CMD indices were compared between the two methods and their agreements at binary cut-off points were assessed. Results: Ninety-six patients and 116 vessels were included. The mean age was 64 ± 11 years, and 20 (21 %) were female. Overall, weak correlations were observed between the Index of Microcirculatory Resistance (IMR) and continuous thermodilution microvascular resistance (Rµ) (rho = 0.30p = 0.001). The median coronary flow reserve (CFR) from continuous thermodilution (CFRcont) and bolus thermodilution (CFRbolus) were 2.19 (1.76-2.67) and 2.55 (1.50-3.58), respectively (p < 0.001). Weak correlation and agreement were observed between CFRcont and CFRbolus (rho = 0.37, p < 0.001, ICC 0.228 [0.055-0.389]). When assessed at CFR cut-off values of 2.0 and 2.5, the methods disagreed in 41 (35 %) and 45 (39 %) of cases, respectively. Conclusions: There is a significant difference and weak agreement between bolus and continuous thermodilution-derived indices, which must be considered when diagnosing CMD in ACS and CCS patients.

Stress perfusion cardiovascular magnetic resonance and serial fractional flow reserve assessment of the left anterior descending artery in patients undergoing right coronary artery chronic total occlusion revascularization.

BACKGROUND: Fractional flow reserve (FFR) assessment of remote arteries, in the context of a bystander chronic total occlusion (CTO), can lead to false positive results. Adenosine stress cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) evaluates perfusion defects across the entire myocardium and may therefore be a reliable tool in the work-up of remote lesions in CTO patients. The IMPACT-CTO study investigated donor artery invasive physiology before, immediately post, and at 4 months following right coronary artery (RCA) CTO percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The aim of this subanalysis was to assess the concordance between baseline perfusion CMR and serial FFR evaluation of left anterior descending artery (LAD) ischemia in patients from the IMPACT-CTO study. METHODS: Baseline adenosine stress CMR examinations from 26 patients were analyzed for qualitative evidence of LAD ischemia. The results were correlated with the serial LAD FFR measurements. RESULTS: The present findings demonstrated that before RCA CTO PCI, there was 62% agreement between perfusion CMR and FFR (ischemic threshold £ 0.8) in the assessment of LAD ischemia (k = 0.29; fair concordance). At 4 months after revascularization, there was 77% agreement (k = 0.52; moderate concordance) between the index CMR assessment of LAD ischemia and the follow-up LAD FFR. Concordance was improved at a LAD FFR ischemic threshold of £ 0.75. CONCLUSIONS: In this hypothesis generating study, baseline CMR assessment of LAD ischemia correlated better with the 4 months LAD FFR data (threshold £ 0.8) as compared to the FFR measurements taken prior to RCA CTO revascularization.

Serial Fractional Flow Reserve Measurements Post Coronary Chronic Total Occlusion Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.

Background The aim of this study was to evaluate the functional result of chronic total occlusion percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) measured by fractional flow reserve (FFR) immediately post the index procedure and at short-term follow-up. Methods and Results This was a prospective single-center observational study. Consecutive patients with right coronary artery chronic total occlusion scheduled for elective PCI were included. FFR measurements were performed immediately after successful PCI and at 4 months follow-up. Twenty-six patients completed baseline and follow-up measurements. Mean age was 61.2±9.7 years, 88.5% of the patients were male, and 19.2% were diabetic. The mean FFR immediately after successful chronic total occlusion PCI was 0.82±0.10 and significantly increased to 0.89±0.07 at 4 months ( P<0.001). The FFR increased in 77% of the patients with a mean absolute increase of 0.07±0.08. The incidence of FFR ≤0.80 immediately after PCI was significantly higher amongst patients with subintimal versus intraplaque recanalization (23% versus 12%; P=0.03). At 4 months, FFR ≤0.80 was found only in 2 patients with subintimal recanalization. At follow-up, 42.7% of the patients continued to have an FFR <0.90. Conclusions Post chronic total occlusion PCI, FFR increased significantly at short-term follow-up compared with measurements post index procedure. Because FFR remained <0.90 in many cases, further efforts should be made to optimize procedural results.

The impact of coronary chronic total occlusion percutaneous coronary intervention upon donor vessel fractional flow reserve and instantaneous wave-free ratio: Implications for physiology-guided PCI in patients with CTO.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the immediate and short term impact of right coronary artery (RCA) chronic total coronary occlusion (CTO) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) upon collateral donor vessel fractional flow reserve (FFR) and instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR). BACKGROUND: CTO PCI influences collateral donor vessel physiology, making the indication and/or timing of donor vessel revascularization difficult to determine. METHODS: In patients with RCA CTO, FFR, iFR, and collateral function index (FFRcoll ) were measured in LAD and LCx pre-CTO PCI, immediately post and at 4 month follow-up. RESULTS: 34 patients underwent successful PCI. In the predominant donor vessel immediately post PCI, FFR, and FFRcoll did not change (0.76 ± 0.12 to 0.75 ± 0.13, P = 0.267 and 0.31 ± 0.10 vs. 0.34 ± 0.11, P = 0.078), but iFR increased significantly (0.86 ± 0.10 to 0.88 ± 0.10, P = 0.012). At follow-up, there was a significant increase in predominant donor FFR and iFR (0.76 ± 0.12 to 0.79 ± 0.11, P = 0.047 and 0.86 ± 0.10 to 0.90 ± 0.07, P = 0.003), accompanied by a significant reduction in FFRcoll (0.31 ± 0.10 to 0.18 ± 0.07 P < 0.0001). These changes resulted in a reclassification of the predominant donor vessel from ischemic to nonischemic in 18% (FFR) and 25% (iFR) of the cases, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Successful recanalization of an RCA CTO resulted in a modest but statistically significant increase in the predominant donor vessel immediately post CTO PCI in the case of iFR and at 4-month follow-up for FFR and iFR compared to pre-PCI with a concomitant reduction in collateral function.

Fractional Flow Reserve: Does a Cut-off Value add Value?

Fractional flow reserve (FFR) has been shown to improve outcomes when used to guide percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). There have been two proposed cut-off points for FFR. The first was derived by comparing FFR against a series of non-invasive tests, with a value of ≤0.75 shown to predict a positive ischaemia test. It was then shown in the DEFER study that a vessel FFR value of ≥0.75 was associated with safe deferral of PCI. During the validation phase, a 'grey zone' for FFR values of between 0.76 and 0.80 was demonstrated, where a positive non-invasive test may still occur, but sensitivity and specificity were sub-optimal. Clinical judgement was therefore advised for values in this range. The FAME studies then moved the FFR cut-off point to ≤0.80, with a view to predicting outcomes. The ≤0.80 cut-off point has been adopted into clinical practice guidelines, whereas the lower value of ≤0.75 is no longer widely used. Here, the authors discuss the data underpinning these cut-off values and the practical implications for their use when using FFR guidance in PCI.