Search

Background: Vessel Fractional Flow Reserve (vFFR) as assessed by three-dimensional quantitative coronary angiography has high correlation with pressure wire-based fractional flow reserve in both a pre- and post-PCI setting. The present study aims to assess the prognostic value of post-PCI vFFR on the incidence of target vessel failure (TVF), a composite endpoint of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction and target vessel revascularization (TVR) at 5-year follow up. Methods: Post-PCI vFFR was calculated after routine PCI in a total of 748 patients (832 vessels) with available orthogonal angiographic projections of the stented segment. Results: Median age was 65 (IQR 55–74) years, 18.2% were diabetic, and 29.1% presented with stable angina. Median post-PCI vFFR was 0.91 (IQR 0.86–0.95). Vessels were categorized into tertiles based on post-PCI vFFR: low (vFFR

Objectives To compare stent recoil (SR) of the thin-strut durable-polymer Zotarolimus-eluting stent (dp-ZES) and the ultrathin-strut bioabsorbable-polymer Sirolimus-eluting stent (bp-SES) in chronic total occlusions (CTOs) and to investigate the predictors of high SR in CTOs. Background Newer ultrathin drug eluting stent might be associated with lower radial force and higher elastic recoil due to the thinner strut design, possibly impacting on the rate of in-stent restenosis and thrombosis. Methods Between January 2017 and November 2019, consecutive patients with CTOs undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention were evaluated. Only patients treated with dp-ZES or bp-SES were included and stratified accordingly. Quantitative coronary angiography analysis was used to assess absolute SR, relative SR, absolute focal SR, relative focal SR, high absolute, and high relative focal SR. Results A total of 128 lesions (67 treated with dp-ZES and 61 with bp-SES) in 123 patients were analyzed. Between bp-SES and dp-ZES no differences were found in absolute SR (p = .188), relative SR (p = .138), absolute focal SR (p = .069), and relative focal SR (p = .064). High absolute and high relative focal SR occurred more frequently in bp-SES than in dp-ZES (p = .004 and p = .015). Bp-SES was a predictor of high absolute focal SR (Odds ratio [OR] 3.29, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.50-7.22, p = .003]. High-pressure postdilation and bp-SES were predictors of high relative focal SR (OR 2.22, 95% CI 1.01-4.86, p = .047; OR 2.74, 95% CI 1.24-6.02, p = .012, respectively). Conclusions Both stents showed an overall low SR. However, ultra-thin strut bp-SES was a predictor of high absolute and high relative focal SR.

BACKGROUND: Calcium is a determinant of paravalvular leakage (PVL) after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). This is based on a fixed contrast attenuation value while X-ray attenuation is patient-dependent and without considering frame expansion and PVL location. We examined the role of calcium in (site-specific) PVL after TAVI using a patient-specific contrast attenuation coefficient combined with frame expansion. METHODS: 57 patients were included with baseline CT, post-TAVI transthoracic echocardiography and rotational angiography (R-angio). Calcium load was assessed using a patient-specific contrast attenuation coefficient. Baseline CT and post-TAVI R-angio were fused to assess frame expansion. PVL was assessed by a core lab. RESULTS: Overall, the highest calcium load was at the non-coronary-cusp-region (NCR, 436 mm3) vs. the right-coronary-cusp-region (RCR, 233 mm3) and the left-coronary-cusp-region (LCR, 244 mm3), p < 0.001. Calcium load was higher in patients with vs. without PVL (1,137 vs. 742 mm3, p = 0.012) and was an independent predictor of PVL (odds ratio, 4.83, p = 0.004). PVL was seen most often in the LCR (39% vs. 21% [RCR] and 19% [NCR]). The degree of frame expansion was 71% at the NCR, 70% at the RCR and 74% at the LCR without difference between patients with or without PVL. CONCLUSIONS: Calcium load was higher in patients with PVL and was an independent predictor of PVL. While calcium was predominantly seen at the NCR, PVL was most often at the LCR. These findings indicate that in addition to calcium, specific anatomic features play a role in PVL after TAVI.

OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to assess the added value and predictive power of the TAVIguide (Added Value of Patient-Specific Computer Simulation in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation) software in clinical practice. BACKGROUND Optimal outcome after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) may become more important as TAVR shifts toward low-risk patients. Patient-specific computer simulation is able to provide prediction of outcome after TAVR. Its clinical role and validation of accuracy, however, have not yet been studied prospectively. METHODS A prospective, observational, multicenter study was conducted among 80 patients with severe aortic stenosis treated with the Evolut R valve. Simulation was performed in 42 patients and no simulation in 38. A comparison between the valve size (decision 1) and target depth of implantation selected by the operator on the basis of multislice computed tomography and the valve size (decision 2) and target depth of implantation selected after simulation were the primary endpoints. Predictive power was examined by comparing the simulated and observed degree of aortic regurgitation. RESULTS Decision 2 differed from decision 1 in 1 of 42 patients because of predicted paravalvular leakage, and changes in valve type occurred in 2 of 42. In 39 of 42 patients, decisions 1 and 2 were similar. Target depth of implantation differed in 7 of 42 patients after simulation (lower in 4 and higher in 3). In 16 of 42 patients, simulation affected the TAVR procedure; in 9, the operator avoided additional measures to achieve the target depth of implantation, and in 7 patients, additional measures were performed. There was a trend toward a higher degree of predicted than observed aortic regurgitation (17.5 vs. 12 ml/s; p = 0.13). CONCLUSIONS Patient-specific computer simulation did not affect valve size selection but did affect the selection of the target depth of implantation and the execution of TAVR to achieve the desired target depth of implantation. (c) 2020 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation.