Diagnostic performance of angiography-derived fractional flow reserve in patients with NSTEMI.

Noninvasive methods of estimating invasively measured fractional flow reserve (FFRinvasive ) are actively being explored, aiming to avoid the use of an invasive pressure wire and the administration of hyperemia-inducing drugs. Coronary angiography-derived FFR (FFRangio ) has already demonstrated its diagnostic performance in the context of stable coronary artery disease. However, its applicability in the context of non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) has yet to be established. We sought to determine the diagnostic performance of FFRangio exclusively in patients presenting with NSTEMI. We performed a prospective, single-center, single-arm, double-blinded study comparing FFR calculated by FFRangio to FFRinvasive in NSTEMI patients. FFRinvasive was measured in all angiographically intermediate lesions (30%-70% stenosis) and was then compared to FFRangio which was calculated at the same position, by a blinded operator. The primary endpoints were the sensitivity and specificity of FFRangio for predicting FFRinvasive using a cut-off value of ≤0.80. Among 100 NSTEMI patients who were screened, 46 patients with 60 vessels in total underwent FFRinvasive and were included in the study. The mean value of FFRinvasive was 0.83 ± 0.3 with 22 (36%) being ≤0.80 while the mean FFRangio was 0.82 ± 0.1 with 22 (36%) being ≤0.80. FFRangio exhibited a sensitivity of 95.5%, a specificity of 97.4%, and a diagnostic accuracy of 96.7%. FFRangio can precisely and noninvasively estimate FFRinvasive in acute coronary syndromes and may have a role in guiding treatment decisions related to angiographically intermediate coronary lesions in this context. WHAT IS KNOWN: FFRangio has demonstrated its diagnostic performance in validation studies, as a noninvasive and cost-effective method in the context of stable coronary artery disease but its performance has never been exclusively evaluated in NSTEMI patients. WHAT IS NEW: The present prospective single-center study demonstrates the excellent diagnostic performance of FFRangio in detecting functionally significant coronary artery stenosis in the setting of NSTEMI, providing more confidence in utilizing FFRangio in this population, avoiding the risk of an invasive pressure wire and the administration of hyperemia-inducing drugs. WHAT IS NEXT: Future randomized trials evaluating FFRangio -guided treatment of coronary artery disease (stable or ACS) are now needed to definitively establish the role of FFRangio in the physiological assessment of coronary lesions.

Angiography-Based Fractional Flow Reserve: State of the Art.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Three-dimensional quantitative coronary angiography-based methods of fractional flow reserve (FFR) derivation have emerged as an appealing alternative to conventional pressure-wire-based physiological lesion assessment and have the potential to further extend the use of physiology in general. Here, we summarize the current evidence related to angiography-based FFR and perspectives on future developments. RECENT FINDINGS: Growing evidence suggests good diagnostic performance of angiography-based FFR measurements, both in chronic and acute coronary syndromes, as well as in specific lesion subsets, such as long and calcified lesions, left main coronary stenosis, and bifurcations. More recently, promising results on the superiority of angiography-based FFR as compared to angiography-guided PCI have been published. Currently available angiography -FFR indices proved to be an excellent alternative to invasive pressure wire-based FFR. Dedicated prospective outcome data comparing these indices to routine guideline recommended PCI including the use of FFR are eagerly awaited.

Head-to-head comparison of two angiography-derived fractional flow reserve techniques in patients with high-risk acute coronary syndrome: A multicenter prospective study.

BACKGROUND: FFRangio and QFR are angiography-based technologies that have been validated in patients with stable coronary artery disease. No head-to-head comparison to invasive fractional flow reserve (FFR) has been reported to date in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS). METHODS: This study is a subset of a larger prospective multicenter, single-arm study that involved patients diagnosed with high-risk ACS in whom 30-70% stenosis was evaluated by FFR. FFRangio and QFR - both calculated offline by 2 different and blinded operators - were calculated and compared to FFR. The two co-primary endpoints were the comparison of the Pearson correlation coefficient between FFRangio and QFR with FFR and the comparison of their inter-observer variability. RESULTS: Among 134 high-risk ACS screened patients, 59 patients with 84 vessels underwent FFR measurements and were included in this study. The mean FFR value was 0.82 ± 0.40 with 32 (38%) being ≤0.80. The mean FFRangio was 0.82 ± 0.20 and the mean QFR was 0.82 ± 0.30, with 27 (32%) and 25 (29%) being ≤0.80, respectively. The Pearson correlation coefficient was significantly better for FFRangio compared to QFR, with R values of 0.76 and 0.61, respectively (p = 0.01). The inter-observer agreement was also significantly better for FFRangio compared to QFR (0.86 vs 0.79, p < 0.05). FFRangio had 91% sensitivity, 100% specificity, and 96.8% accuracy, while QFR exhibited 86.4% sensitivity, 98.4% specificity, and 93.7% accuracy. CONCLUSION: In patients with high-risk ACS, FFRangio and QFR demonstrated excellent diagnostic performance. FFRangio seems to have better correlation to invasive FFR compared to QFR but further larger validation studies are required.

Noninvasive estimation of Fraction Flow Reserve (FFR): The first real-time FFRangio™ application in Greece.

We report the first case of real-time FFRangio™ application in Greece applied in a patient with tandem lesions in the proximal segment of the left anterior descendent artery.