Search

Background: Recently, non-hyperemic pressure ratios (NHPRs) have been validated as a reliable alternative to fractional flow reserve (FFR). However, a discordance between FFR and NHPRs is observed in 20-25% of cases. The aim of this study is to evaluate predictors of discordance between FFR and diastolic Pressure ratio (dPR)., Methods: PREDICT is a retrospective, single center, investigator-initiated study including 813 patients (1092vessels) who underwent FFR assessment of intermediate coronary lesions (angiographic 30%-80% stenosis). dPR was calculated using individual pressure waveforms and dedicated software. Clinical, angiographic and hemodynamic variables were compared between patients with concordant and discordant FFR and dPR values., Results: Median age was 65 (IQR:59-73) years and 70% were male. Hemodynamically significant lesions, as defined by FFR ≤ 0.80, and dPR ≤ 0.89, were identified in 29.6% and 30.3% of cases, respectively. Overall, FFR and dPR values were discordant in 22.1% patients (17.4% of the vessels). Discordance was related to FFR+/dPR- and FFR-/dPR + in 11.8% and 10.3% of patients, respectively.In case of FFR-dPR discordance, a higher prevalence of left anterior descending arteries lesions was observed (70.5% vs. 53.1%, p < 0.001) and mean values of both FFR and dPR were significantly lower (FFR 0.81 ± 0.05 vs 0.85 ± 0.08, p < 0.001, and dPR 0.89 ± 0.04 vs 0.92 ± 0.08,p < 0.001) as compared to vessels with FFR and dPR concordance. Following multivariable adjustment, dPR delta (defined as the absolute difference between measured dPR to the cut-off value of 0.89) turned out to be the only independent predictor of discordance (OR = 0.74, 95% CI 0.68-0.79, p < 0.001)., Conclusion: Our study suggests that FFR-to-dPR discordance occurs in approximately one-fifth of patients. Absolute dPR delta appears to be the only independent predictor of discordance., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper: [Conflicts of interest: Joost Daemen received institutional grant/research support from Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, ACIST Medical, Medtronic, Microport, Pie Medical, and ReCor medical, and consultancy and speaker fees from Abbott Vascular, Abiomed, ACIST medical, Boston Scientific, Cardialysis BV, CardiacBooster, Kaminari Medical, ReCor Medical, PulseCath, Pie Medical, Sanofi, Siemens Health Care and Medtronic. Nicolas M. van Mieghem received research grant support from Abbott Vascular, Boston scientific, Biotronik, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Abiomed, PulseCath BV, Daiichi Sankyo. The other authors have no conflict of interest to declare.]., (© 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.