期刊
JACC-CARDIOVASCULAR INTERVENTIONS
卷 10, 期 24, 页码 2514-2524出版社
ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcin.2017.09.021
关键词
CFR; coronary flow reserve; coronary physiology; FFR; fractional flow reserve; iFR; instantaneous wave-free ratio
资金
- National Institute for Health Research (NIHR)
- Imperial College Healthcare National Health Service Trust Biomedical Research Centre
- Volcano Corporation
- Philips
- AstraZeneca
- Medtronic
- Pfizer
- Volcano-Philips
- Volcano
- Abbott/St. Jude Medical
- MRC [G1100443, MR/M018369/1] Funding Source: UKRI
- British Heart Foundation [FS/10/38/28268, FS/14/27/30752] Funding Source: researchfish
- Medical Research Council [G1100443, MR/M018369/1] Funding Source: researchfish
- National Institute for Health Research [CL-2015-21-001] Funding Source: researchfish
OBJECTIVES The study sought to determine the coronary flow characteristics of angiographically intermediate stenoses classified as discordant by fractional flow reserve (FFR) and instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR). BACKGROUND Discordance between FFR and iFR occurs in up to 20% of cases. No comparisons have been reported between the coronary flow characteristics of FFR/iFR discordant and angiographically unobstructed vessels. METHODS Baseline and hyperemic coronary flow velocity and coronary flow reserve (CFR) were compared across 5 vessel groups: FFR+/iFR+ (108 vessels, n = 91), FFR-/iFR+ (28 vessels, n = 24), FFR+/iFR-(22 vessels, n = 22), FFR-/iFR-(208 vessels, n = 154), and an unobstructed vessel group (201 vessels, n = 153), in a post hoc analysis of the largest combined pressure and Doppler flow velocity registry (IDEAL [Iberian-Dutch-English] collaborators study). RESULTS FFR disagreed with iFR in 14%(50 of 366). Baseline flow velocity was similar across all 5 vessel groups, including the unobstructed vessel group (p = 0.34 for variance). In FFR+/iFR-discordants, hyperemic flow velocity and CFR were similar to both FFR-/iFR- and unobstructed groups; 37.6 (interquartile range [IQR]: 26.1 to 50.4) cm/s vs. 40.0 [IQR: 29.7 to 52.3] cm/s and 42.2 [IQR: 33.8 to 53.2] cm/s and CFR 2.36 [IQR: 1.93 to 2.81] vs. 2.41 [IQR: 1.84 to 2.94] and 2.50 [IQR: 2.11 to 3.17], respectively (p > 0.05 for all). In FFR-/iFR+ discordants, hyperemic flow velocity, and CFR were similar to the FFR+/iFR+ group; 28.2 (IQR: 20.5 to 39.7) cm/s versus 23.5 (IQR: 16.4 to 34.9) cm/s and CFR 1.44 (IQR: 1.29 to 1.85) versus 1.39 (IQR: 1.06 to 1.88), respectively (p > 0.05 for all). CONCLUSIONS FFR/iFR disagreement was explained by differences in hyperemic coronary flow velocity. Furthermore, coronary stenoses classified as FFR+/iFR- demonstrated similar coronary flow characteristics to angiographically unobstructed vessels. (c) 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier on behalf of the American College of Cardiology Foundation.
作者
我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。
推荐
暂无数据