Benefits of immediate complete revascularization in patients with acute coronary syndromes.

Acute coronary syndrome is one of the leading causes of death worldwide. Up to 60% of patients present with additional significant non-culprit lesions. Complete revascularization (CR) of all (culprit and non-culprit) lesions is recommended and recent randomized trials showed the benefit of performing complete multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention in a single setting. Immediate CR is associated with a reduced risk of repeat myocardial infarction and unplanned ischemia driven revascularization. Furthermore, immediate CR resulted in less implanted stents, total contrast use and a shorter duration of hospitalization while maintaining a similar success rate of complete revascularization. Further studies need to evaluate the role of coronary physiology and intravascular imaging for enhanced understanding of the pathophysiology of early events in non-culprit lesions.

Diagnostic Accuracy of Coronary Angiography-Based Vessel Fractional Flow Reserve (vFFR) Virtual Stenting.

3D coronary angiography-based vessel fractional flow reserve (vFFR) proved to be an accurate diagnostic alternative to invasively measured pressure wire based fractional flow reserve (FFR). The ability to compute post-PCI vFFR using pre-PCI vFFR virtual stent analysis is unknown. We aimed to assess the feasibility and diagnostic accuracy of pre-PCI vFFR virtual stenting analysis (residual vFFR) with post-PCI FFR as a reference. This is an observational, single-center retrospective cohort study including consecutive patients from the FFR-SEARCH registry. We blindly calculated residual vFFR from pre-PCI angiograms and compared them to invasive pressure-wire based post-PCI FFR. Inclusion criteria involved presentation with either stable or unstable angina or non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), ≥1 significant stenosis in one of the epicardial coronary arteries (percentage diameter stenosis of >70% by QCA or hemodynamically relevant stenosis with FFR ≤0.80) and pre procedural angiograms eligible for vFFR analysis. Exclusion criteria comprised patients with ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), coronary bypass grafts, cardiogenic shock or severe hemodynamic instability. Eighty-one pre-PCI residual vFFR measurements were compared to post-PCI FFR and post-PCI vFFR measurements. Mean residual vFFR was 0.91 ± 0.06, mean post-PCI FFR 0.91 ± 0.06 and mean post-PCI vFFR was 0.92 ± 0.05. Residual vFFR showed a high linear correlation (r = 0.84) and good agreement (mean difference (95% confidence interval): 0.005 (−0.002−0.012)) with post-PCI FFR, as well as with post-PCI-vFFR (r = 0.77, mean difference −0.007 (−0.015−0.0003)). Residual vFFR showed good accuracy in the identification of lesions with post-PCI FFR < 0.90 (sensitivity 94%, specificity 71%, area under the curve (AUC) 0.93 (95% CI: 0.86−0.99), p < 0.001). Virtual stenting using vFFR provided an accurate estimation of post-PCI FFR and post-PCI vFFR. Further studies are needed to prospectively validate a vFFR-guided PCI strategy.