Physiological Assessment with iFR prior to FFR Measurement in Left Main Disease.

Despite guideline-based recommendation of the interchangeable use of instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) and fractional flow reserve (FFR) to guide revascularization decision-making, iFR/FFR could demonstrate different physiological or clinical outcomes in some specific patient or lesion subsets. Therefore, we sought to investigate the impact of difference between iFR and FFR-guided revascularization decision-making on clinical outcomes in patients with left main disease (LMD). In this international multicenter registry of LMD with physiological interrogation, we identified 275 patients in whom physiological assessment was performed with both iFR/FFR. Major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) was defined as a composite of death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization. The receiver-operating characteristic analysis was performed for both iFR/FFR to predict MACE in respective patients in whom revascularization was deferred and performed. In 153 patients of revascularization deferral, MACE occurred in 17.0% patients. The optimal cut-off values of iFR and FFR to predict MACE were 0.88 (specificity:0.74; sensitivity:0.65) and 0.76 (specificity:0.81; sensitivity:0.46), respectively. The area under the curve (AUC) was significantly higher for iFR than FFR (0.74; 95%CI 0.62-0.85 vs. 0.62; 95%CI 0.48-0.75; p = 0.012). In 122 patients of coronary revascularization, MACE occurred in 13.1% patients. The optimal cut-off values of iFR and FFR were 0.92 (specificity:0.93; sensitivity:0.25) and 0.81 (specificity:0.047; sensitivity:1.00), respectively. The AUCs were not significantly different between iFR and FFR (0.57; 95%CI 0.40-0.73 vs. 0.46; 95%CI 0.31-0.61; p = 0.43). While neither baseline iFR nor FFR was predictive of MACE in patients in whom revascularization was performed, iFR-guided deferral seemed to be safer than FFR-guided deferral.

Intracoronary electrocardiogram detects coronary microvascular dysfunction and ischemia in patients with no obstructive coronary arteries disease.

BACKGROUND: Coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMD) is the leading cause of ischemia with no obstructive coronary arteries disease (INOCA) disease. Diagnosis of CMD relies on surrogate physiological indices without objective proof of ischemia. OBJECTIVES: Intracoronary electrocardiogram (icECG) derived hyperemic indices may accurately and objectively detect CMD and reversible ischemia in related territory. METHODS: INOCA patients with proven ischemia by myocardial perfusion scan (MPS) and completely normal coronary arteries underwent simultaneous intracoronary electrophysiological (icECG) and physiological (intracoronary Doppler) assessment in all 3 coronary arteries during rest and under adenosine induced hyperemia. RESULTS: Sixty vessels in 21 patients were included in the final analysis. All patients had at least one vessel with abnormal CFR. 41 vessels had CMD (CFR < 2.5), of which 26 had increased microvascular resistance (structural CMD, HMR > 1.9 mmHg.cm-1.s) and 15 vessels had CMD (CFR < 2.5) with normal microvascular resistance (functional CMD, HMR <= 1.9 mmHg.cm-1.s). Only one-third of the patients (n = 7) had impaired CFR < 2.5 in all 3 epicardial arteries. Absolute ST shift between hyperemia and rest (∆ST) has shown the best diagnostic performance for ischemia (cut-off 0.10 mV, sensitivity: 95%, specificity: 72%, accuracy: 80%, AUC: 0.860) outperforming physiological indices (CFR: 0.623 and HMR: 0.653 DeLong's test P = .0002). CONCLUSIONS: In INOCA patients, CMD involves coronary artery territories heterogeneously. icECG can accurately detect CMD causing perfusion abnormalities in patients with INOCA outperforming physiological CMD markers, by demonstrating actual ischemia instead of predicting the likelihood of inducible ischemia based on violated surrogate thresholds of blunted flow reserve or increased minimum microvascular resistance. CONDENSED ABSTRACT: In 21 INOCA patients with coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMD) and myocardial perfusion scan proved ischemia, hyperemic indices of intracoronary electrocardiogram (icECG) have accurately detected vessel-specific CMD and resulting perfusion abnormalities & ischemia, outperforming invasive hemodynamic indices. Absolute ST shift between hyperemia and rest (∆ST) has shown the best classification performance for ischemia in no Obstructive Coronary Arteries (AUC: 0.860) outperforming Doppler derived CMD indices (CFR: 0.623 and HMR: 0.653 DeLong's test P = .0002).icECG can be used to diagnose CMD causing perfusion defects by demonstrating actual reversible ischemia at vessel-level during the initial CAG session, obviating the need for further costly ischemia tests. CLINICALTRIALS: GOV: NCT05471739.

Deferred Versus Performed Revascularization for Left Main Coronary Disease With Hemodynamic Significance.

BACKGROUND: The majority of randomized controlled trials of revascularization decision-making excludes left main coronary artery disease (LMD). Therefore, contemporary clinical outcomes of patients with stable coronary artery disease and LMD with proven ischemia remain poorly understood. The aim of this study was to assess the long-term clinical outcomes of physiologically significant LMD according to the treatment strategies of revascularization versus revascularization deferral. METHODS: In this international multicenter registry of stable LMD interrogated with the instantaneous wave-free ratio, patients with physiologically significant ischemia (instantaneous wave-free ratio ≤0.89) were analyzed according to the coronary revascularization (n=151) versus revascularization deferral (n=74). Propensity score matching was performed to adjust for baseline clinical characteristics. The primary end point was a composite of death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization of left main stem. The secondary end points were as follows: cardiac death or spontaneous LMD-related myocardial infarction; and ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization of left main stem. RESULTS: At a median follow-up period of 2.8 years, the primary end point occurred in 11 patients (14.9%) in the revascularized group and 21 patients (28.4%) in the deferred group (hazard ratio, 0.42 [95% CI, 0.20-0.89]; P=0.023). For the secondary end points, cardiac death or LMD-related myocardial infarction occurred significantly less frequently in the revascularized group (0.0% versus 8.1%; P=0.004). The rate of ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization of left main stem was also significantly lower in the revascularized group (5.4% versus 17.6%; hazard ratio, 0.20 [95% CI, 0.056-0.70]; P=0.012). CONCLUSIONS: In patients who underwent revascularization for stable coronary artery disease and physiologically significant LMD determined by instantaneous wave-free ratio, the long-term clinical outcomes were significantly improved as compared with those in whom revascularization was deferred.

Physiology-guided PCI versus CABG for left main coronary artery disease: insights from the DEFINE-LM registry.

There have been no studies comparing clinical outcomes of physiology-guided revascularization in patients with unprotected left main coronary disease (ULMD) between percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) vs. coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). The aim of this study was to assess the long-term clinical outcomes between PCI and CABG of patients with physiologically significant ULMD. From an international multicenter registry of ULMD patients interrogated with instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR), we analyzed data from 151 patients (85 PCI vs. 66 CABG) who underwent revascularization according to the cutoff value of iFR ≤ 0.89. Propensity score matching was employed to adjust for baseline clinical characteristics. The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization. The secondary endpoints were the individual components of the primary endpoint. Mean age was 66.6 (± 9.2) years, 79.2% male. Mean SYNTAX score was 22.6 (± 8.4) and median iFR was 0.83 (IQR 0.74-0.87). After performing propensity score matching analysis, 48 patients treated with CABG were matched to those who underwent PCI. At a median follow-up period of 2.8 years, the primary endpoint occurred in 8.3% in PCI group and 20.8% in CABG group, respectively (HR 3.80; 95% CI 1.04-13.9; p = 0.043). There was no difference in each component of the primary event (p > 0.05 for all). Within the present study, iFR-guided PCI was associated with lower cardiovascular events rate in patients with ULMD and intermediate SYNTAX score, as compared to CABG. State-of-the-art PCI vs. CABG for ULMD. Study design and primary endpoint in patients with physiologically significant ULMD. MACE was defined as the composite of all-cause death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization. The blue line denotes the PCI arm, and the red line denotes the CABG arm. PCI was associated with significantly lower risk of MACE than CABG. CABG: coronary artery bypass grafting; iFR: instantaneous wave-free ratio; MACE: major adverse cardiovascular events; PCI: percutaneous coronary intervention; ULMD: unprotected left main coronary artery disease.

Angiography-derived functional assessment of left main coronary stenoses.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of quantitative flow ratio (QFR) in left main (LM) coronary stenoses, using Fractional Flow Reserve (FFR) as reference. BACKGROUND: QFR has demonstrated a high accuracy in determining the functional relevance of coronary stenoses in non-LM. However, there is an important paucity of data regarding its diagnostic value in the specific anatomical subset of LM disease. METHODS: This is a retrospective, observational, multicenter, international, and blinded study including patients with LM stenoses. Cases with significant ostial LM disease were excluded. QFR was calculated from conventional angiograms at blinded fashion with respect to FFR. RESULTS: Sixty-seven patients with LM stenoses were analyzed. Overall, LM had intermediate severity, both from angiographic (diameter stenosis [%DS] 43.8 ± 11.1%) and functional perspective (FFR 0.756 ± 0.105). Mean QFR was 0.733 ± 0.159. Correlation between QFR and FFR was moderate (r = 0.590). Positive and negative predictive value, sensitivity and specificity were 85.4%, 64%, 85.4%, and 69.6% respectively. Classification agreement of QFR and FFR in terms of functional stenosis severity was 78.1%. Area under the receiver operating characteristics of QFR using FFR as reference was 0.82 [95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71-0.93], and significantly better than angiographic evaluation including %DS (area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve [AUC] 0.45 [95% CI, 0.32-0.58], p < 0.001) and minimum lumen diameter (AUC 0.60 [95% CI, 0.47-0.74], p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with FFR, QFR has acceptable diagnostic performance in determining the functional relevance of LM stenosis, being better than conventional angiographic assessment. Nonetheless, caution should be taken when applying functional angiography techniques for the assessment of LM stenosis given its particular anatomical characteristics.

Coronary microcirculation in nonculprit vessel territory in reperfused acute myocardial infarction.

BACKGROUND: There is an ongoing debate on the extension of reperfusion-related microvascular damage (MVD) throughout the remote noninfarcted myocardial regions in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) that undergo primary percutaneous intervention (pPCI). The aim of this study was to elucidate the impact of reperfusion on remote microcirculatory territory by analyzing hemodynamic alterations in the nonculprit-vessel in relation to reperfusion. METHODS: A total of 20 patients with STEMI undergoing pPCI were included. Peri-reperfusion temporal changes in hemodynamic parameters were obtained in angiographically normal nonculprit vessels before and 1-h after reopening of the culprit vessel. Intracoronary pressure and flow velocity data were compared using pairwise analyses (before and 1-h after reperfusion). RESULTS: In the non-culprit vessel, compared to the pre-reperfusion state, mean resting average peak velocity (33.4 ± 9.4 to 25.0 ± 4.9 cm/s, P < 0.001) and mean hyperemic average peak velocity (53.5 ± 14.4 to 42.1 ± 10.66 cm/s, P = 0.001) significantly decreased; whereas baseline (3.2 ± 1.0 to 4.0 ± 1.0 mmHg.cm-1.s, P < 0.001) and hyperemic microvascular resistance (HMR) (1.9 ± 0.6 to 2.4 ± 0.7 mmHg.cm-1.s, P < 0.001) and mean zero flow pressure (Pzf) values (32.5 ± 6.9 to 37.6 ± 8.3 mmHg, P = 0.003) significantly increased 1-h after reperfusion. In particular, the magnitude of changes in HMR and Pzf values following reperfusion were more prominent in patients with larger infarct size and with higher extent of MVD in the culprit vessel territory. CONCLUSION: Reperfusion-related microvascular injury extends to involve remote myocardial territory in relation to the magnitude of the adjacent infarction and infarct-zone MVD. (GUARD Clinical TrialsNCT02732080).

Gradual Versus Abrupt Reperfusion During Primary Percutaneous Coronary Interventions in ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (GUARD).

Background Intramyocardial edema and hemorrhage are key pathological mechanisms in the development of reperfusion-related microvascular damage in ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction. These processes may be facilitated by abrupt restoration of intracoronary pressure and flow triggered by primary percutaneous coronary intervention. We investigated whether pressure-controlled reperfusion via gradual reopening of the infarct-related artery may limit microvascular injury in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Methods and Results A total of 83 patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction were assessed for eligibility and 53 who did not meet inclusion criteria were excluded. The remaining 30 patients with totally occluded infarct-related artery were randomized to the pressure-controlled reperfusion with delayed stenting (PCRDS) group (n=15) or standard primary percutaneous coronary intervention with immediate stenting (IS) group (n=15) (intention-to-treat population). Data from 5 patients in each arm were unsuitable to be included in the final analysis. Finally, 20 patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention who were randomly assigned to either IS (n=10) or PCRDS (n=10) were included. In the PCRDS arm, a 1.5-mm balloon was used to achieve initial reperfusion with thrombolysis in myocardial infarction grade 3 flow and, subsequently, to control distal intracoronary pressure over a 30-minute monitoring period (MP) until stenting was performed. In both study groups, continuous assessment of coronary hemodynamics with intracoronary pressure and Doppler flow velocity was performed, with a final measurement of zero flow pressure (primary end point of the study) at the end of a 60-minute MP. There were no complications associated with IS or PCRDS. PCRDS effectively led to lower distal intracoronary pressures than IS over 30 minutes after reperfusion (71.2±9.37 mm Hg versus 90.13±12.09 mm Hg, P=0.001). Significant differences were noted between study arms in the microcirculatory response over MP. Microvascular perfusion progressively deteriorated in the IS group and at the end of MP, and hyperemic microvascular resistance was significantly higher in the IS arm as compared with the PCDRS arm (2.83±0.56 mm Hg.s.cm-1 versus 1.83±0.53 mm Hg.s.cm-1, P=0.001). The primary end point (zero flow pressure) was significantly lower in the PCRDS group than in the IS group (41.46±17.85 mm Hg versus 76.87±21.34 mm Hg, P=0.001). In the whole study group (n=20), reperfusion pressures measured at predefined stages in the early reperfusion period showed robust associations with zero flow pressure values measured at the end of the 1-hour MP (immediately after reperfusion: r=0.782, P<0.001; at the 10th minute: r=0.796, P<0.001; and at the 20th minute: r=0.702, P=0.001) and peak creatine kinase MB level (immediately after reperfusion: r=0.653, P=0.002; at the 10th minute: r=0.597, P=0.007; and at the 20th minute: r=0.538, P=0.017). Enzymatic myocardial infarction size was lower in the PCRDS group than in the IS group with peak troponin T (5395±2991 ng/mL versus 8874±1927 ng/mL, P=0.006) and creatine kinase MB (163.6±93.4 IU/L versus 542.2±227.4 IU/L, P<0.001). Conclusions In patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, pressure-controlled reperfusion of the culprit vessel by means of gradual reopening of the occluded infarct-related artery (PCRDS) led to better-preserved coronary microvascular integrity and smaller myocardial infarction size, without an increase in procedural complications, compared with IS. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02732080.

Phasic flow patterns of right versus left coronary arteries in patients undergoing clinical physiological assessment.

BACKGROUND: Coronary blood flow in humans is known to be predominantly diastolic. Small studies in animals and humans suggest that this is less pronounced or even reversed in the right coronary artery (RCA). AIMS: This study aimed to characterise the phasic patterns of coronary flow in the left versus right coronary arteries of patients undergoing invasive physiological assessment. METHODS: We analysed data from the Iberian-Dutch-English Collaborators (IDEAL) study. A total of 482 simultaneous pressure and flow measurements from 301 patients were included in our analysis. RESULTS: On average, coronary flow was higher in diastole both at rest and during hyperaemia in both the RCA and LCA (mean diastolic-to-systolic velocity ratio [DSVR] was, respectively, 1.85±0.70, 1.76±0.58, 1.53±0.34 and 1.58±0.43 for LCArest, LCAhyp, RCArest and RCAhyp, p<0.001 for between-vessel comparisons). Although the type of RCA dominance affected the DSVR magnitude (RCAdom=1.55±0.35, RCAco-dom=1.40±0.27, RCAnon-dom=1.35; standard deviation not reported as n=3), systolic flow was very rarely predominant (DSVR was greater than or equal to 1.00 in 472/482 cases [97.9%] overall), with equal prevalence in the LCA. Stenosis severity or microvascular dysfunction had a negligible impact on DSVR in both the RCA and LCA (DSVR x hyperaemic stenosis resistance R2 =0.018, p=0.03 and DSVR x coronary flow reserve R2 <0.001, p=0.98). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with coronary artery disease undergoing physiological assessment, diastolic flow predominance is seen in both left and right coronary arteries. Clinical interpretation of coronary physiological data should therefore not differ between the left and the right coronary systems.

Immediate impact of coronary artery bypass graft surgery on regional myocardial perfusion: Results from the Collaborative Pilot Study to Determine the Correlation Between Intraoperative Observations Using Spy Near-Infrared Imaging and Cardiac Catheterization Laboratory Physiological Assessment of Lesion Severity.

Objectives: Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is performed using anatomic guidance. Data connecting the physiologic significance of the coronary vessel stenosis to the acute physiologic response to grafting are lacking. The Collaborative Pilot Study to Determine the Correlation Between Intraoperative Observations Using Spy Near-Infrared Imaging and Cardiac Catheterization Laboratory Physiological Assessment of Lesion Severity study is the first to compare preintervention coronary physiology with the acute regional myocardial perfusion change (RMP-QC) at CABG in a per-graft analysis. Methods: Non-emergent patients undergoing diagnostic catheterization suitable for multivessel CABG were enrolled. Synergy between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention with Taxus score, fractional flow reserve (FFR), instantaneous wave free ratio (iFR), and quantitative coronary angiography was documented in 75 epicardial coronary arteries, with 62 angiographically intermediate and 13 severe stenoses. At CABG, near-infrared fluorescence analysis quantified the relative change (post- vs pregrafting, termed RMP-QC) in the grafted vessel's perfusion territory. Scatter plots were constructed for RMP-QC versus quantitative coronary angiography and RMP-QC versus FFR/iFR. Exact quadrant randomization test for randomness was used. Results: There was no relationship between RMP-QC and quantitative coronary angiography percent diameter stenosis, whether all study vessels were included (P = .949) or vessels with core-lab quantitative coronary angiography only (P = .922). A significant nonrandom association between RMP-QC and FFR (P = .025), as well as between RMP-QC and iFR (P = .008), was documented. These associations remained when excluding vessels with assigned FFR and iFR values (P = .0092 and P = .0006 for FFR and iFR, respectively). Conclusions: The Collaborative Pilot Study to Determine the Correlation Between Intraoperative Observations Using Spy Near-Infrared Imaging and Cardiac Catheterization Laboratory Physiological Assessment of Lesion Severity study demonstrates there is no association between angiographic coronary stenosis severity and the acute perfusion change after grafting; there is an association between functional stenosis severity and absolute increase in regional myocardial perfusion after CABG.

Robotics, imaging, and artificial intelligence in the catheterisation laboratory.

The catheterisation laboratory today combines diagnosis and therapeutics, through various imaging modalities and a prolific list of interventional tools, led by balloons and stents. In this review, we focus primarily on advances in image-based coronary interventions. The X-ray images that are the primary modality for diagnosis and interventions are combined with novel tools for visualisation and display, including multi-imaging co-registration modalities with three- and four-dimensional presentations. Interpretation of the physiologic significance of coronary stenosis based on prior angiographic images is being explored and implemented. Major efforts to reduce X-ray exposure to the staff and the patients, using computer-based algorithms for image processing, and novel methods to limit the radiation spread are being explored. The use of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning for better patient care requires attention to universal methods for sharing and combining large data sets and for allowing interpretation and analysis of large cohorts of patients. Barriers to data sharing using integrated and universal protocols should be overcome to allow these methods to become widely applicable. Robotic catheterisation takes the physician away from the ionising radiation spot, enables coronary angioplasty and stenting without compromising safety, and may allow increased precision. Remote coronary procedures over the internet, that have been explored in virtual and animal studies and already applied to patients in a small pilot study, open possibilities for sharing experience across the world without travelling. Application of those technologies to neurovascular, and particularly stroke interventions, may be very timely in view of the need for expert neuro-interventionalists located mostly in central areas.

Comparing invasive hemodynamic responses in adenosine hyperemia versus physical exercise stress in chronic coronary syndromes.

OBJECTIVES: Adenosine hyperemia is an integral component of the physiological assessment of obstructive coronary artery disease in patients with chronic coronary syndrome (CCS). The aim of this study was to compare systemic, coronary and microcirculatory hemodynamics between intravenous (IV) adenosine hyperemia versus physical exercise stress in patients with CCS and coronary stenosis. METHODS: Twenty-three patients (mean age, 60.6 ± 8.1 years) with CCS and single-vessel coronary stenosis underwent cardiac catheterization. Continuous trans-stenotic coronary pressure-flow measurements were performed during: i) IV adenosine hyperemia, and ii) physical exercise using a catheter-table-mounted supine ergometer. Systemic, coronary and microcirculatory hemodynamic responses were compared between IV adenosine and exercise stimuli. RESULTS: Mean stenosis diameter was 74.6% ± 10.4. Median (interquartile range) FFR was 0.54 (0.44-0.72). At adenosine hyperemia versus exercise stress, mean aortic pressure (Pa, 91 ± 16 mmHg vs 99 ± 15 mmHg, p < 0.0001), distal coronary pressure (Pd, 58 ± 21 mmHg vs 69 ± 24 mmHg, p < 0.0001), trans-stenotic pressure ratio (Pd/Pa, 0.63 ± 0.18 vs 0.69 ± 0.19, p < 0.0001), microvascular resistance (MR, 2.9 ± 2.2 mmHg.cm-1.sec-1 vs 4.2 ± 1.7 mmHg.cm-1.sec-1, p = 0.001), heart rate (HR, 80 ± 15 bpm vs 85 ± 21 bpm, p = 0.02) and rate-pressure product (RPP, 7522 ± 2335 vs 9077 ± 3200, p = 0.0001) were all lower. Conversely, coronary flow velocity (APV, 23.7 ± 9.5 cm/s vs 18.5 ± 6.8 cm/s, p = 0.02) was higher. Additionally, temporal changes in Pa, Pd, Pd/Pa, MR, HR, RPP and APV during IV adenosine hyperemia versus exercise were all significantly different (p < 0.05 for all). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with CCS and coronary stenosis, invasive hemodynamic responses differed markedly between IV adenosine hyperemia versus physical exercise stress. These differences were observed across systemic, coronary and microcirculatory hemodynamics.

Correlation of Intravascular Ultrasound and Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio in Patients With Intermediate Left Main Coronary Artery Disease.

BACKGROUND: There is great degree of interobserver variability in the visual angiographic assessment of left main coronary disease (LMCD). Fractional flow reserve and intravascular ultrasound are often used in this setting. The use of instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) for evaluation of LMCD has not been well studied. The aim of this study is to evaluate the use of iFR in the assessment of angiographically intermediate LMCD. METHODS: This is an international multicenter retrospective observational study of patients who underwent both iFR and intravascular ultrasound evaluation for angiographically intermediate LMCD. An independent core laboratory performed blinded off-line analysis of all intravascular ultrasound data. A minimum lumen area of 6 mm2 was used as the cutoff for significant disease. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-five patients (mean age, 68.4±9.5 years, 84.8% male) were included in this analysis. Receiver operating curve analysis showed that an iFR of ≤0.89 identified minimum lumen area <6 mm2 with an area under the curve of 0.77 (77% sensitivity, 66% specificity; P<0.0001). Among the 69 patients without ostial left anterior descending artery or left circumflex artery disease, receiver operating curve analysis showed that an iFR of ≤0.89 identified minimum lumen area <6 mm2 with an area under the curve of 0.84 (70% sensitivity, 84% specificity; P<0.0001). The correlation was not significantly different when the body surface area was considered. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, in patients with intermediate LMCD, iFR of ≤0.89 correlates with intravascular ultrasound minimum lumen area <6 mm2 regardless of body surface area. The current study supports the use of iFR for the evaluation of intermediate LMCD.

Achieving optimal adherence to medical therapy by telehealth: Findings from the ORBITA medication adherence sub-study.

INTRODUCTION: The ORBITA trial of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) versus a placebo procedure for patients with stable angina was conducted across six sites in the United Kingdom via home monitoring and telephone consultations. Patients underwent detailed assessment of medication adherence which allowed us to measure the efficacy of the implementation of the optimization protocol and interpretation of the main trial endpoints. METHODS: Prescribing data were collected throughout the trial. Self-reported adherence was assessed, and urine samples collected at pre-randomization and at follow-up for direct assessment of adherence using high-performance liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry (HPLC MS/MS). RESULTS: Self-reported adherence was >96% for all drugs in both treatment groups at both stages. The percentage of samples in which drug was detected at pre-randomization and at follow-up in the PCI versus placebo groups respectively was: clopidogrel, 96% versus 90% and 98% versus 94%; atorvastatin, 95% versus 92% and 92% versus 91%; perindopril, 95% versus 97% and 85% versus 100%; bisoprolol, 98% versus 99% and 96% versus 97%; amlodipine, 99% versus 99% and 94% versus 96%; nicorandil, 98% versus 96% and 94% versus 92%; ivabradine, 100% versus 100% and 100% versus 100%; and ranolazine, 100% versus 100% and 100% versus 100%. CONCLUSIONS: Adherence levels were high throughout the study when quantified by self-reporting methods and similarly high proportions of drug were detected by urinary assay. The results indicate successful implementation of the optimization protocol delivered by telephone, an approach that could serve as a model for treatment of chronic conditions, particularly as consultations are increasingly conducted online.

Inter-observer differences in interpretation of coronary pressure-wire pullback data by non-expert interventional cardiologists.

The physiological pattern of coronary artery disease as determined by pressure-wire (PW)-pullback is important for decision-making of revascularization and risk stratification of patients. However, it remains unclear whether inter-observer differences in interpreting PW-pullback data are subject to the expertise of physicians. This study sought to investigate the subjectivity of this assessment among non-experts. Expert interventional cardiologists classified 545 PW-pullback traces into physiologically focal or physiologically diffuse disease pattern. Defining expert-consensus as the reference standard, we evaluated ten non-expert doctors' classification performance. Observers were stratified equally by two ways: (i) years of experience as interventional cardiologists (middle-level vs. junior-level) and (ii) volume of institutions where they belonged to (high-volume center vs. low-volume center). When judged against the expert-consensus, the agreement of non-expert observers in assessing physiological pattern of disease (focal or diffuse) ranged from 69.1 to 85.0% (p for heterogeneity < 0.0001). There was no evidence for a moderating effect of years of experience; the pooled accuracy of middle-level doctors was 78.8% (95% confidential interval [CI] 72.8-84.7%) vs. 79.1% for junior-level doctors (95% CI 75.9-82.2%, p = 0.95 for difference). On the other hand, we observed a significant moderating effect of center volume. Accuracy across non-experts in high-volume centers was 82.7% (95% CI 80.3-85.1%) vs. 75.1% for low-volume centers (95% CI 71.9-78.3%, p = 0.0002 for difference). Interpretation of PW-pullback by non-expert interventional cardiologists was considerably subjective.

Revascularization Deferral of Nonculprit Stenoses on the Basis of Fractional Flow Reserve: 1-Year Outcomes of 8,579 Patients.

BACKGROUND: Intracoronary physiology is increasingly used in nonculprit stenoses of patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS). However, evidence regarding the safety of fractional flow reserve-based deferral in patients with ACS, compared with patients with stable angina pectoris (SAP), is scarce. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety of revascularization deferral on the basis of fractional flow reserve interrogation of nonculprit lesions in patients with ACS. METHODS: A pooled analysis was performed of individual patient data included in 5 large international published studies on physiology-guided revascularization. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (a composite of death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or unplanned revascularization) at 1-year follow-up. Clinical outcomes of patients with ACS and SAP were compared in both the deferred and the revascularized groups. RESULTS: A total of 8,579 patients were included in the analysis, 6,461 with SAP and 2,118 with ACS and nonculprit stenoses. Using fractional flow reserve, revascularization was deferred in 5,129 patients (59.8%) and performed in 3,450 patients (40.2%). In the deferred ACS group, a higher MACE rate was observed compared with the deferred SAP group (4.46% vs. 2.83%; adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 1.72; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.17 to 2.53; p < 0.01). In particular, early unplanned revascularization (3.34% and 2.04% in ACS and SAP; adjusted HR: 1.81; 95% CI: 1.09 to 3.00; p = 0.02) contributed to this excess in MACE but the difference between the ACS and SAP groups did not reach statistical significance. On the contrary, no differences in outcomes linked to clinical presentation were found in treated patients (MACE rate 6.51% vs. 6.20%; adjusted HR: 1.21; 95% CI: 0.88 to 1.26; p = 0.24). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with ACS in whom revascularization of nonculprit lesions was deferred on the basis of fractional flow reserve have more MACE at 1 year compared with patients with SAP with deferred revascularization. Unplanned revascularization mainly contributed to this excess of MACE.

Coronary Flow Capacity to Identify Stenosis Associated With Coronary Flow Improvement After Revascularization: A Combined Analysis From DEFINE FLOW and IDEAL.

Background Coronary flow capacity (CFC), which is a categorical assessment based on the combination of hyperemic coronary flow and coronary flow reserve (CFR), has been introduced as a comprehensive assessment of the coronary circulation to overcome the limitations of CFR alone. The aim of this study was to quantify coronary flow changes after percutaneous coronary intervention in relation to the classification of CFC and the current physiological cutoff values of fractional flow reserve, instantaneous wave-free ratio, and CFR. Methods and Results Using the combined data set from DEFINE FLOW (Distal Evaluation of Functional Performance With Intravascular Sensors to Assess the Narrowing Effect -Combined Pressure and Doppler FLOW Velocity Measurements) and IDEAL (Iberian-Dutch-English), a total of 133 vessels that underwent intracoronary Doppler flow measurement before and after percutaneous coronary intervention were analyzed. CFC classified prerevascularization lesions as normal (14), mildly reduced (40), moderately reduced (31), and severely reduced (48). Lesions with larger impairment of CFC showed greater increase in coronary flow and vice versa (median percent increase in coronary flow by revascularization: 4.2%, 25.9%, 50.1%, and 145.5%, respectively; P<0.001). Compared with the conventional cutoff values of fractional flow reserve, instantaneous wave-free ratio, and CFR, an ischemic CFC defined as moderately to severely reduced CFC showed higher diagnostic accuracy with higher specificity to predict a >50% increase in coronary flow after percutaneous coronary intervention. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis demonstrated that only CFC has a superior predictive efficacy to CFR (P<0.05). Multivariate analysis revealed lesions with ischemic CFC to be the independent predictor of a significant coronary flow increase after percutaneous coronary intervention (odds ratio, 10.7; 95% CI, 4.6-24.8; P<0.001). Conclusions CFC showed significant improvement of identification of lesions that benefit from revascularization compared with CFR with respect to coronary flow increase. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02328820.

The Impact of Coronary Physiology on Contemporary Clinical Decision Making.

Physiological assessment of coronary artery disease (CAD) has become one of the cornerstones of decision making for myocardial revascularization, with a large body of evidence supporting the benefits of using fractional flow reserve and other pressure-based indexes for functional assessment of coronary stenoses. Furthermore, physiology allows the identification of specific vascular dysfunction mechanisms in patients without obstructive CAD. Currently, more than 10 modalities of functional coronary assessment are available, although the overall adoption of these physiological tools, of either intracoronary or image-based nature, is still low. In this paper the authors review these modalities of functional coronary assessment according to their timing of use: outside the catheterization laboratory, in the catheterization laboratory prior to the percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), and in the catheterization laboratory during or after PCI. The authors discuss how the information obtained can be used in setting the indication for PCI, in planning and guiding the procedure, and in documenting the final functional result of the intervention. The advantages and limitations of each modality in each setting are discussed. Furthermore, the key value of intracoronary physiology in diagnosing mechanisms of microcirculatory dysfunction, which account for the presence of ischemia in many patients without obstructive CAD, is revisited. On the basis of the opportunities generated by the multiplicity of diagnostic tools described, the authors propose an algorithmic approach to physiological coronary investigations in clinical practice, with the key aims of: 1) avoiding unneeded revascularization procedures; 2) improving procedural PCI and long-term outcomes in patients with obstructive CAD; and 3) diagnosing vascular dysfunction mechanisms that can be effectively treated in patients with NOCAD. The authors believe that such structured approach may also contribute to the wider adoption of available technologies for functional assessment of patients with CAD.

Objective Identification of Intermediate Lesions Inducing Myocardial Ischemia Using Sequential Intracoronary Pressure and Flow Measurements.

Background Although ischemic heart disease has a complex and multilevel origin, the diagnostic approach is mainly focused on focal obstructive disease as assessed by pressure-derived indexes. The prognostic relevance of coronary flow over coronary pressure has been suggested and implies that identification of relevant perfusion abnormalities by invasive physiology techniques is critical for the correct identification of patients who benefit from coronary revascularization. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic potential of a sequential approach using pressure-derived indexes instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR), fractional flow reserve (FFR), and coronary flow reserve (CFR) measurements to determine the number of intermediate lesions associated with flow abnormalities after initial pressure measurements. Methods and Results A total of 366 intermediate lesions were assessed with simultaneous intracoronary pressure and flow velocity measurements. Contemporary clinical iFR, FFR, and CFR cut points for myocardial ischemia were applied. A total of 118 (32%) lesions were FFR+ and 136 (37%) lesions were iFR+. Subsequent CFR assessment resulted for FFR in a total of 91 (25%) FFR+/CFR+ and for iFR a total of 111 (30%) iFR+/CFR+ lesions. An iFR, FFR, and invasive flow velocity assessment approach would have yielded 20% of lesions (74 of 366) as ischemic. Conclusions Ultimately, 20% of intermediate lesions are associated with flow abnormalities after applying a pressure and flow velocity sequential approach. If iFR is borderline, FFR has limited additional value, in contrast with CFR. These results emphasize the use of coronary physiology in assessing stenosis severity but may also further question the contemporary reputation of a pressure-based approach as a gold standard for the detection of myocardial ischemia in ischemic heart disease.