Search

Background: In order to facilitate fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guided lesion assessment, several 3-dimensional (3D)-angiography-based physiological indices have been recently validated. Thus far, limited data are available on the association of these indices with conventional forms of ischemia testing., Aim: The aim of the study was to determine the association between 3D-angiography-based vessel-FFR (vFFR) and myocardial ischemia as assessed by exercise electrocardiography (ECG) testing, dobutamine stress echocardiography, single photon emission computed tomography myocardial perfusion imaging (SPECTMPI), and stress cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging (stress CMR)., Methods: FAST ISCHEMIA is a retrospective, single-center cohort study including patients who underwent non-invasive myocardial ischemia testing and subsequent coronary angiography (≤3 months). A total of 145 patients (340 vessels) were analyzed. The overall patient-based sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), positive likelihood ratio (LR+), and negative likelihood ratio (LR-) of vFFR ≤0.80 in any vessel for ischemia was 64% (95% confidence interval [CI], 53-74), 71% (95% CI, 54-84), 83% (95% CI, 72-91), 46% (95% CI, 33-60), 2.16 (95% CI, 1.25-3.74), and 0.52 (95% CI, 0.36-0.74), respectively. Multivariable logistic regression showed that vFFR ≤0.80 was significantly associated with ischemia on a patient level (odds ratio, 8.13; 95% CI, 2.51-30.06; P<.001) and on a vascular territory level (odds ratio, 2.75; 95% CI, 1.17-6.44; P<.01)., Conclusion: Our study suggests that vFFR ≤0.80 has a modest association with non-invasive myocardial ischemia testing using either exercise ECG or stress imaging modalities. After correcting for independent confounders, vFFR was independently associated with ischemia on a non-invasive myocardial ischemia detection test.

Objective: Thinner stent struts might lead to a higher risk of recoil and subsequently a smaller minimal stent area (MSA), which is known to be the strongest predictor of stent failure. We compared procedural performance between an ultrathin-strut biodegradable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (BP-SES) and a durable-polymer zotarolimus-eluting stent (DP-ZES) using intracoronary imaging., Methods: A consecutive cohort of patients underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with either BP-SES or DP-ZES in a pseudorandomized fashion between July 2018 and October 2019. In the present subanalysis, we included cases in which post-PCI imaging with intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) or optical coherence tomography (OCT) was performed. The primary endpoint of the study was MSA. Secondary endpoints included percentage stent expansion and presence of residual edge disease, malapposition, tissue protrusion, submedial edge dissections, or edge hematoma., Results: A total of 141 treated lesions (78 BP-SES and 63 DP-ZES) in 127 patients were analyzed. Median age was 69.3 years (interquartile range [IQR], 57.3-75.6) and 74.0% of patients were male. All baseline and procedural characteristics were comparable between both groups. Median MSA was 5.80 mm² (IQR, 4.40-7.24) for BP-SES and 6.35 mm² (IQR, 4.76-8.31) for DP-ZES (P=.15). No significant differences in stent expansion, residual edge disease and presence of malapposition, tissue protrusion, submedial edge dissections, or edge hematomas were found. Stent diameter and stent length were found to be independent predictors of MSA., Conclusions: No significant differences in MSA were found between lesions treated with BP-SES vs DP-ZES. BP-SES and DP-ZES were comparable in terms of procedural performance.

Background: Vessel fractional flow reserve (vFFR) has a high diagnostic accuracy in assessing functional lesion significance compared with FFR. Nonhyperemic pressure ratios (NHPRs) were noninferior to FFR to guide revascularization of intermediate lesions. Therefore, the diagnostic performance of vFFR compared with NHPR warrants interest., Aim: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of vFFR with a generic diastolic pressure ratio (dPR) as a reference., Methods: The study population was derived from the FAST EXTEND and FAST II studies. Between January 2016 and September 2020, a total of 475 patients were enrolled., Results: Median dPR was 0.92 (interquartile range [IQR], 0.87-0.95), median vFFR was 0.86 (IQR, 0.80-0.90). The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and diagnostic accuracy of vFFR ≤0.80 for dPR ≤0.89 were 66%, 92%, 79%, 85%, and 84%, respectively. Vessel FFR showed a good agreement with dPR (r=0.68), consistent among specific clinical lesion subsets and a high diagnostic accuracy for dPR ≤0.89 (area under the curve=0.89). Discordance between vFFR and dPR was observed in 78/492 cases (15.6%) and logistic regression analysis did not reveal any clinical, angiographic, or hemodynamic variables associated with vFFR and dPR discordance., Conclusion: Vessel FFR shows a good agreement with dPR and a high diagnostic accuracy for dPR ≤0.89.