Ai Hu, Zheng Naixin, Li Le, Yang Guojian, Li Hui, Tang Guodong, Zhou Qi, Zhang Huiping, Yu Xue, Xu Feng, Zhao Ying, Sun Fucheng
Department of Cardiology, National Center of Gerontology, Institute of Geriatric Medicine, Beijing Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
The MOH Key Laboratory of Geriatrics, National Center of Gerontology, Beijing Hospital, Beijing, China.
Front Cardiovasc Med. 2021 Apr 23;8:654392. doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2021.654392. eCollection 2021.
Coronary angiography-derived fractional flow reserve (caFFR) measurements have shown good correlations and agreement with invasive wire-based fractional flow reserve (FFR) measurements. However, few studies have examined the diagnostic performance of caFFR measurements before and after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). This study sought to compare the diagnostic performance of caFFR measurements against wire-based FFR measurements in patients before and after PCI. Patients who underwent FFR-guided PCI were eligible for the acquisition of caFFR measurements. Offline caFFR measurements were performed by blinded hospital operators in a core laboratory. The primary endpoint was the vessel-oriented composite endpoint (VOCE), defined as a composite of vessel-related cardiovascular death, vessel-related myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization. A total of 105 pre-PCI caFFR measurements and 65 post-PCI caFFR measurements were compared against available wire-based FFR measurements. A strong linear correlation was found between wire-based FFR and caFFR measurements ( = 0.77; < 0.001) before PCI, and caFFR measurements also showed a high correlation ( = 0.82; < 0.001) with wire-based FFR measurements after PCI. A total of 6 VOCEs were observed in 61 patients during follow-up. Post-PCI FFR values (≤0.82) in the target vessel was the strongest predictor of VOCE [hazard ratio (HR): 5.59; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.12-27.96; = 0.036). Similarly, patients with low post-PCI caFFR values (≤0.83) showed an 8-fold higher risk of VOCE than those with high post-PCI caFFR values (>0.83; HR: 8.83; 95% CI: 1.46-53.44; = 0.017). The study showed that the caFFR measurements were well-correlated and in agreement with invasive wire-based FFR measurements before and after PCI. Similar to wire-based FFR measurements, post-PCI caFFR measurements can be used to identify patients with a higher risk for adverse events associated with PCI.
冠状动脉造影衍生的血流储备分数(caFFR)测量结果已显示出与基于侵入性导丝的血流储备分数(FFR)测量结果具有良好的相关性和一致性。然而,很少有研究考察经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)前后caFFR测量的诊断性能。本研究旨在比较PCI前后患者中caFFR测量与基于导丝的FFR测量的诊断性能。接受FFR指导的PCI的患者有资格进行caFFR测量。离线caFFR测量由核心实验室中不知情的医院操作人员进行。主要终点是血管导向复合终点(VOCE),定义为与血管相关的心血管死亡、与血管相关的心肌梗死和靶血管血运重建的复合终点。将总共105次PCI前caFFR测量和65次PCI后caFFR测量与现有的基于导丝的FFR测量进行比较。PCI前,基于导丝的FFR与caFFR测量之间发现强线性相关性(r = 0.77;P < 0.001),PCI后caFFR测量与基于导丝的FFR测量也显示出高度相关性(r = 0.82;P < 0.001)。随访期间,61例患者中共观察到6例VOCE。靶血管中PCI后FFR值(≤0.82)是VOCE的最强预测因素[危险比(HR):5.59;95%置信区间(CI):1.12 - 27.96;P = 0.036]。同样,PCI后caFFR值低(≤0.83)的患者发生VOCE的风险比PCI后caFFR值高(>0.83)的患者高8倍(HR:8.83;95%CI:1.46 - 53.44;P = 0.017)。该研究表明,caFFR测量与PCI前后基于侵入性导丝的FFR测量具有良好的相关性和一致性。与基于导丝的FFR测量类似,PCI后caFFR测量可用于识别PCI相关不良事件风险较高的患者。