Julien Adjedj

Continuum of Vasodilator Stress From Rest to Contrast Medium to Adenosine Hyperemia for Fractional Flow Reserve Assessment

OBJECTIVES This study compared the diagnostic performance with adenosine-derived fractional flow reserve (FFR) ≤0.8 of contrast-based FFR (cFFR), resting distal pressure (Pd)/aortic pressure (Pa), and the instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR). BACKGROUND FFR objectively identifies lesions that benefit from medical therapy versus revascularization. However, FFR requires maximal vasodilation, usually achieved with adenosine. Radiographic contrast injection causes submaximal coronary hyperemia. Therefore, intracoronary contrast could provide an easy and inexpensive tool for predicting FFR. METHODS We recruited patients undergoing routine FFR assessment and made paired, repeated measurements of all physiology metrics (Pd/Pa, iFR, cFFR, and FFR). Contrast medium and dose were per local practice, as was the dose of intracoronary adenosine. Operators were encouraged to perform both intracoronary and intravenous adenosine assessments and a final drift check to assess wire calibration. A central core lab analyzed blinded pressure tracings in a standardized fashion. RESULTS A total of 763 subjects were enrolled from 12 international centers. Contrast volume was 8 ± 2 ml per measurement, and 8 different contrast media were used. Repeated measurements of each metric showed a bias <0.005, but a lower SD (less variability) for cFFR than resting indexes. Although Pd/Pa and iFR demonstrated equivalent performance against FFR ≤0.8 (78.5% vs. 79.9% accuracy; p = 0.78; area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve: 0.875 vs. 0.881; p = 0.35), cFFR improved both metrics (85.8% accuracy and 0.930 area; p < 0.001 for each) with an optimal binary threshold of 0.83. A hybrid decision-making strategy using cFFR required adenosine less often than when based on either Pd/Pa or iFR. CONCLUSIONS cFFR provides diagnostic performance superior to that of Pd/Pa or iFR for predicting FFR. For clinical scenarios or health care systems in which adenosine is contraindicated or prohibitively expensive, cFFR offers a universal technique to simplify invasive coronary physiological assessments. Yet FFR remains the reference standard for diagnostic certainty as even cFFR reached only ∼85% agreement.

Intracoronary Adenosine: Dose-Response Relationship With Hyperemia.

OBJECTIVES The present study sought to establish the dosage of intracoronary (IC) adenosine associated with minimal side effects and above which no further increase in flow can be expected. BACKGROUND Despite the widespread adoption of IC adenosine in clinical practice, no wide-ranging, dose-response study has been conducted. A recurring debate still exists regarding its optimal dose. METHODS In 30 patients, Doppler-derived flow velocity measurements were obtained in 10 right coronary arteries (RCAs) and 20 left coronary arteries (LCAs) free of stenoses >20% in diameter. Flow velocity was measured at baseline and after 8 ml bolus administrations of arterial blood, saline, contrast medium, and 9 escalating doses of adenosine (4 to 500 μg). The hyperemic value was expressed in percent of the maximum flow velocity reached in a given artery (Q/Qmax, %). RESULTS Q/Qmax did not increase significantly beyond dosages of 60 μg for the RCA and 160 μg for LCA. Heart rate did not change, whereas mean arterial blood pressure decreased by a maximum of 7% (p < 0.05) after bolus injections of IC adenosine. The incidence of transient A-V blocks was 40% after injection of 100 μg in the RCA and was 15% after injection of 200 μg in the LCA. The duration of the plateau reached 12 ± 13 s after injection of 100 μg in the RCA and 21 ± 6 s after the injection of 200 μg in the LCA. A progressive prolongation of the time needed to return to baseline was observed. Hyperemic response after injection of 8 ml of contrast medium reached 65 ± 36% of that achieved after injection of 200 μg of adenosine. CONCLUSIONS This wide-ranging, dose-response study indicates that an IC adenosine bolus injection of 100 μg in the RCA and 200 μg in the LCA induces maximum hyperemia while being associated with minimal side effects.

Impact of Right Atrial Pressure on Fractional Flow Reserve Measurements: Comparison of Fractional Flow Reserve and Myocardial Fractional Flow Reserve in 1,600 Coronary Stenoses

OBJECTIVES This study sought to assess the impact of a wide range of mean right atrial pressure (Pra) on fractional flow reserve (FFR) measurements. BACKGROUND FFR invasively assesses the ischemic potential of coronary stenoses. FFR is calculated as the ratio of mean distal coronary pressure (Pd) to mean aortic pressure (Pa) during maximal hyperemia. The Pra is considered to have little impact if it is within normal range, so it is neglected in the formula. METHODS In 1,676 stenoses of 1,235 patients undergoing left-right heart catheterization for ischemic (642 [52%]) or valvular heart disease (593 [48%]), the authors compared the FFR values calculated without accounting for Pra (FFR= Pd/Pa) to the corresponding myocardial fractional flow reserve (FFRmyo) values accounting for Pra (FFRmyo = Pd - Pra/Pa - Pra). RESULTS The median Pra was 7 (interquartile range [IQR]: 5 to 10) mm Hg with a maximum of 27 mm Hg. The correlation and agreement between FFR and FFRmyo was excellent (R(2) = 0.987; slope 1.096 ± 0.003). The median FFR (0.85; IQR: 0.78 to 0.91) was slightly but statistically significantly higher than the median FFRmyo (0.83; IQR: 0.76 to 0.90; p < 0.001) with a median difference of 0.01 (IQR: 0.01 to 0.02). Values of FFR above the cutoff of 0.80 provided an FFRmyo ≤0.80 in 110 (9%) stenoses. No FFR value above 0.80 provided an FFRmyo ≤0.75. CONCLUSIONS The difference between FFR and FFRmyo was minimal even in patients with markedly increased Pra. FFR values above the gray zone (i.e., >0.80) did not yield values below the gray zone (i.e., ≤0.75) in any case, which suggests that the impact of right atrial pressure on FFR measurement is indeed negligible.

Catheter-based measurements of absolute coronary blood flow and microvascular resistance feasibility, safety, and reproducibility in humans

Background— The principle of continuous thermodilution can be used to calculate absolute coronary blood flow and microvascular resistance (R). The aim of the study is to explore the safety, feasibility, and reproducibility of coronary blood flow and R measurements as measured by continuous thermodilution in humans. Methods and Results— Absolute coronary flow and R can be calculated by thermodilution by infusing saline at room temperature through a dedicated monorail catheter. The temperature of saline as it enters the vessel, the temperature of blood and saline mixed in the distal part of the vessel, and the distal coronary pressure were measured by a pressure/temperature sensor-tipped guidewire. The feasibility and safety of the method were tested in 135 patients who were referred for coronary angiography. No significant adverse events were observed; in 11 (8.1%) patients, bradycardia and concomitant atrioventricular block appeared transiently and were reversed immediately on interruption of the infusion. The reproducibility of measurements was tested in a subgroup of 80 patients (129 arteries). Duplicate measurements had a strong correlation both for coronary blood flow (&rgr;=0.841, P<0.001; intraclass correlation coefficient=0.89, P<0.001) and R (&rgr;=0.780, P<0.001; intraclass correlation coefficient=0.89, P<0.001). In Bland–Altman plots, there was no significant bias or asymmetry. Conclusions— Absolute coronary blood flow (in L/min) and R (in mm Hg/L/min or Wood units) can be safely and reproducibly measured with continuous thermodilution. This approach constitutes a new opportunity for the study of the coronary microcirculation.

Visual and Quantitative Assessment of Coronary Stenoses at Angiography Versus Fractional Flow Reserve

Background— The correlation between angiographic assessment of coronary stenoses and fractional flow reserve (FFR) is weak. Whether and how risk factors impact the diagnostic accuracy of angiography is unknown. We sought to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of angiography by visual estimate and by quantitative coronary angiography when compared with FFR and evaluate the influence of risk factors (RF) on this accuracy. Methods and Results— In 1382 coronary stenoses (1104 patients), percent diameter stenosis by visual estimation (DSVE) and by quantitative coronary angiography (DSQCA) was compared with FFR. Patients were divided into 4 subgroups, according to the presence of RFs, and the relationship between DSVE, DSQCA, and FFR was analyzed. Overall, DSVE was significantly higher than DSQCA (P<0.0001); nonetheless, when examined by strata of DS, DSVE was significantly smaller than DSQCA in mild stenoses, although the reverse held true for severe stenoses. Compared with FFR, a large scatter was observed for both DSVE and DSQCA. When using a dichotomous FFR value of 0.80, C statistic was significantly higher for DSVE than for DSQCA (0.712 versus 0.640, respectively; P<0.001). C statistics for DSVE decreased progressively as RFs accumulated (0.776 for ⩽1 RF, 0.750 for 2 RFs, 0.713 for 3 RFs and 0.627 for ≥4 RFs; P=0.0053). In addition, in diabetics, the relationship between FFR and angiographic indices was particularly weak (C statistics: 0.524 for DSVE and 0.511 for DSQCA). Conclusions— Overall, DSVE has a better diagnostic accuracy than DSQCA to predict the functional significance of coronary stenosis. The predictive accuracy of angiography is moderate in patients with ⩽1 RFs, but weakens as RFs accumulate, especially in diabetics.

A Handbook of Primary PCI: No-Reflow Management

Although substantial progress has been made in recent decades in reducing mortality and performing optimal revascularization in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and stable coronary artery disease (CAD), one of the remaining challenges is to better prevent and treat extended myocardial damage despite “apparent” angiographic optimal percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The presence of no-reflow is related to higher risk of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) due to the poor healing of the infarct, adverse left ventricular remodelling, congestive heart failure occurrence and death. Despite optimal epicardial coronary artery reperfusion performed by PCI, distal microembolization into the coronary microcirculation limits myocardial salvage especially during ACS. No-reflow represents the ultimate stage of extended myocardial damage after PCI with absence of contrast medium progression in the coronary artery. This complication occurs mainly during ACS or during PCI of rotational atherectomy and venous graft in stable patients. The objective of this chapter is to describe how to manage a no-reflow phenomenon from the pathophysiology to the management in order to help physician to prevent this complication and if no-reflow occurs adapt therapeutics to limit myocardial damage and reduce poor outcomes.

In vitro flow and optical coherence tomography comparison of two bailout techniques after failed provisional stenting for bifurcation percutaneous coronary interventions

To evaluate, in vitro, SB stenting techniques after failed provisional stenting. We aimed to compare flows and stent strut apposition of T and protrusion (TAP) versus Reversed String (RS) techniques using a flow simulator, optical coherence tomography (OCT) using silicon bifurcation phantoms with different bifurcation angulations.