Prognostic impact of resting full-cycle ratio and diastolic non-hyperemic pressure ratios in patients with deferred revascularization.

BACKGROUND: Non-hyperemic pressure ratios (NHPRs) like resting full-cycle ratio (RFR), diastolic pressure ratio during entire diastole (dPR[entire]) and diastolic pressure ratio during wave-free period (dPR[WFP]) are increasingly used to guide revascularization. The effect of NHPRs on mid-term prognosis has not been well established. OBJECTIVE: We investigated the prognostic implications of NHRPs in patients whose revascularization was deferred based on fractional flow reserve (FFR) in a single-centre population. METHODS: NHPRs and FFR were calculated offline from pressure tracings by an independent core laboratory. Follow-up data were acquired through records of hospital visits or telephone interviews. The primary outcome was a vessel-oriented composite outcome (VOCO) (a composite of cardiac death, vessel-related myocardial infarction, and ischemia-driven revascularization) in deferred vessels at 2 years. RESULTS: 316 patients with 377 deferred lesions were analysed. Discordance of NHPRs and FFR was found in 13.0-18.3% of lesions. The correlation coefficient between NHPRs was 0.99 (95% confidence interval 0.99-1.00). At 2 years, VOCO occurred in 19 lesions (5.0%). Estimated glomerular filtration rate < 30 mL/min/1.73 m2 [hazard ratio (HR) 5.7, p = 0.002], previous myocardial infarction (HR 3.3, p = 0.018), diabetes (HR 2.7, p = 0.042), RFR ≤ 0.89 (HR 2.7, p = 0.041) and dPR[WFP] ≤ 0.89 (HR 2.7, p = 0.049) were associated with higher incidence of VOCO at 2 years in the univariable analysis. A non-significant trend was found for dPR[entire] (HR 1.9, p = 0.26). CONCLUSION: A positive RFR or dPR[WFP] were associated with a worse prognosis in deferred lesions, suggesting that the use of NHPRs in addition to FFR may improve risk estimation.

Comparison of vessel fractional flow reserve with invasive resting full-cycle ratio in patients with intermediate coronary lesions.

BACKGROUND: Vessel fractional flow reserve (vFFR) is a novel angiography-derived index for the assessment of myocardial ischemia without the need for pressure wires and hyperemic agents. vFFR has demonstrated very good diagnostic performance compared with the hyperemic index fractional flow reserve (FFR). The aim of this study was to compare vFFR to the non-hyperemic pressure ratio resting full-cycle ratio (RFR). METHODS: This was a retrospective, observational, single-center study of an all-comer cohort undergoing RFR assessment. Invasive coronary angiography was obtained without a dedicated vFFR acquisition protocol, and vFFR calculation was attempted in all vessels interrogated by RFR (1483 lesions of 1030 patients). RESULTS: vFFR could be analyzed in 986 lesions from 705 patients. Median diameter stenosis was 37% (interquartile range (IQR): 30.0-44.0%), vFFR 0.86 (IQR: 0.81-0.91) and RFR 0.94 (IQR: (0.90-0.97). The correlation between vFFR and RFR was strong (r = 0.70, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.66-0.74, p < 0.001). Using RFR ≤0.89 as reference, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and overall diagnostic accuracy for vFFR were 77%, 93%, 77%, and 92% and 89%. vFFR yielded a high area under the curve (AUC) of 0.92 (95% CI: 0.90-0.94). The good diagnostic performance of vFFR was confirmed among subgroups of patients with diabetes, severe aortic stenosis, female gender and lesions located in the left anterior descending artery. CONCLUSION: vFFR has a high diagnostic performance taking RFR as the reference standard for evaluating the functional significance of coronary stenoses.