Department of Interventional Cardiology Royal Papworth Hospital Cambridge United Kingdom.
Division of Cardiovascular Medicine University of Cambridge United Kingdom.
J Am Heart Assoc. 2022 May 3;11(9):e023554. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.121.023554. Epub 2022 Apr 26.
Background Post-percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) fractional flow reserve ≥0.90 is an accepted marker of procedural success, and a cutoff of ≥0.95 has recently been proposed for post-PCI instantaneous wave-free ratio. However, stability of nonhyperemic pressure ratios (NHPRs) post-PCI is not well characterized, and transient reactive submaximal hyperemia post-PCI may affect their precision. We performed this study to assess stability and reproducibility of NHPRs post-PCI. Methods and Results Fifty-seven patients (age, 63.77±10.67 years; men, 71%) underwent hemodynamic assessment immediately post-PCI and then after a recovery period of 10, 20, and 30 minutes and repeated at 3 months. Manual offline analysis was performed to derive resting and hyperemic pressure indexes (Pd/Pa resting pressure gradient, mathematically derived instantaneous wave-free ratio, resting full cycle ratio, and fractional flow reserve) and microcirculatory resistances (basal microvascular resistance and index of microvascular resistance). Transient submaximal hyperemia occurring post-PCI was demonstrated by longer thermodilution time at 30 minutes compared with immediately post-PCI; mean difference of thermodilution time was 0.17 seconds (95% CI, 0.07-0.26 seconds; =0.04). Basal microcirculatory resistance was also higher at 30 minutes than immediately post-PCI; mean difference of basal microvascular resistance was 10.89 mm Hg.s (95% CI, 2.25-19.52 mm Hg.s; =0.04). Despite this, group analysis confirmed no significant differences in the values of resting whole cycle pressure ratios (Pd/Pa and resting full cycle ratio) as well as diastolic pressure ratios (diastolic pressure ratio and mathematically derived instantaneous wave-free ratio). Whole cardiac cycle NHPRs demonstrated the best overall stability post-PCI, and 1 in 5 repeated diastolic NHPRs crossed the clinical decision threshold. Conclusions Whole cycle NHPRs demonstrate better reproducibility and clinical precision post-PCI than diastolic NHPRs, possibly because of less perturbation from predominantly diastolic reactive hyperemia and left ventricular stunning. Registration URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03502083; Unique identifier: NCT03502083 and URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03076476; Unique identifier: NCT03076476.
经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)后,分数血流储备(fractional flow reserve,FFR)≥0.90 是手术成功的公认标志,最近提出 PCI 后即刻无波比(instantaneous wave-free ratio,iFR)的截断值≥0.95。然而,PCI 后非充血压力比(nonhyperemic pressure ratios,NHPRs)的稳定性尚未得到很好的描述,PCI 后短暂的反应性亚最大充血可能会影响其精确性。我们进行了这项研究,以评估 PCI 后 NHPRs 的稳定性和可重复性。
57 例患者(年龄 63.77±10.67 岁;男性 71%)在 PCI 后立即进行血流动力学评估,然后在 10、20 和 30 分钟后恢复,并在 3 个月时重复。手动离线分析用于推导静息和充血压力指数(Pd/Pa 静息压力梯度、数学衍生的即刻无波比、静息全周期比和 FFR)和微血管阻力(基础微血管阻力和微血管阻力指数)。与 PCI 后即刻相比,30 分钟时出现的短暂亚最大充血显示出更长的热稀释时间;热稀释时间的平均差异为 0.17 秒(95%置信区间:0.07-0.26 秒;=0.04)。30 分钟时的基础微血管阻力也高于 PCI 后即刻;基础微血管阻力的平均差异为 10.89mmHg·s(95%置信区间:2.25-19.52mmHg·s;=0.04)。尽管如此,组分析证实,静息全周期压力比(Pd/Pa 和静息全周期比)以及舒张期压力比(舒张期压力比和数学衍生的即刻无波比)的值没有显著差异。整个心脏周期的 NHPRs 在 PCI 后表现出最佳的整体稳定性,1/5 次重复的舒张期 NHPR 越过了临床决策阈值。
整个心脏周期的 NHPRs 在 PCI 后具有更好的可重复性和临床精度,可能是由于主要由舒张期反应性充血和左心室顿抑引起的干扰较少。
https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03502083;唯一标识符:NCT03502083 和网址:https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03076476;唯一标识符:NCT03076476。