Angiogram based fractional flow reserve in patients with dual/triple vessel coronary artery disease

• Published in: International journal of cardiology Vol. 283; pp. 17 - 22
• Main Authors: Omori, H., Witberg, G., Kawase, Y., Tanigaki, T., Okamoto, S., Hirata, T., Sobue, Y., Ota, H., Kamiya, H., Okubo, M., Valzer, O., Kornowski, R., Matsuo, H.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Netherlands Elsevier B.V 15.05.2019
• Subjects: Aged; Coronary Angiography - methods; Coronary Artery Disease - diagnosis; Coronary Artery Disease - physiopathology; Coronary physiology; Coronary Vessels - diagnostic imaging; Coronary Vessels - physiopathology; Female; Follow-Up Studies; Fractional flow reserve; Fractional Flow Reserve, Myocardial - physiology; Humans; Male; Multivessel coronary artery disease; Prospective Studies; Reproducibility of Results; Severity of Illness Index; SS; Multivessel coronary artery disease; FFR; Coronary physiology; CAD; fSS; PCI; FFRCT; STEMI; MVD; Fractional flow reserve
• ISSN: 0167-5273; 1874-1754
• DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2019.01.072

To assess the performance of angiography derived Fractional Flow Reserve (FFRangio) in multivessel disease (MVD) patients undergoing angiography. FFR is the reference standard for physiologic assessment of coronary stenosis and guidance of revascularization, especially in patients with MVD, yet it remains grossly underutilized. The non-wire based FFRangio performs well in non-MVD patients, but its accuracy in MVD is unknown. A prospective clinical study was conducted at Gifu Heart Centre, Japan. Patients underwent physiologic assessment of all relevant coronary lesions using wire-based FFR (wbFFR) and FFRangio. Primary outcome was diagnostic performance (sensitivity, specificity, accuracy) for FFRangio with wbFFR as reference. Other outcomes were the correlation between wbFFR/FFRangio, time required for wbFFR/FFRangio measurements, and the effect of wbFFR/FFRangio on the reclassification of coronary disease severity. Fifty patients (118 lesions in total) were included. Mean age was 72 ± 9 years, 72% were male, 36% had triple vessel disease and the average SYNTAX score was 13. The mean measurement of wbFFR and FFRangio were 0.83 ± 0.12 and 0.81 ± 0.11, respectively. Accuracy, sensitivity and specificity for FFRangio were 92.3% (95% CI 79.1–98.4%), 92.4% (95% CI 84.3–97.2%) and 92.4% (95% CI 87.4–97.3%), respectively. Pearson's r between wbFFR and FFRangio was 0.83. FFRangio measurement was faster than wbFFR (9.6 ± 3.4 vs. 15.0 ± 8.9 min, p < 0.001). In patients with MVD, FFRangio shows good correlation and excellent diagnostic performance compared to wbFFR, and measuring FFRangio is faster than wbFFR. These results highlight the potential clinical benefits of utilizing FFRangio among patients with MVD. •FFR is grossly underutilized in clinical practice.•Angiography derived FFR modalities may help increase the use of physiologic assessment, but their accuracy in MVD patients has not been examined.•In MVD patients, FFRangio showed excellent diagnostic performance, while saving roughly a third of the time required for physiologic assessment.•The effect of FFRangio on functional SYNTAX score calculation/reclassification of coronary disease severity was similar to that of invasive FFR