Katalog Plus
Bibliothek der Frankfurt UAS
Bald neuer Katalog: sichern Sie sich schon vorab Ihre persönlichen Merklisten im Nutzerkonto: Anleitung.
Dieses Ergebnis aus BASE kann Gästen nicht angezeigt werden.  Login für vollen Zugriff.

Physiological pattern of disease assessed by pressure-wire pullback has an influence on fractional flow reserve/instantaneous wave-free ratio discordance

Title: Physiological pattern of disease assessed by pressure-wire pullback has an influence on fractional flow reserve/instantaneous wave-free ratio discordance
Authors: Warisawa, T; Cook, CM; Howard, JP; Ahmad, Y; Doi, S; Nakayama, M; Goto, S; Yakuta, Y; Karube, K; Shun-Shin, MJ; Petraco, R; Sen, S; Nijjer, S; Al Lamee, R; Ishibashi, Y; Matsuda, H; Escaned, J; Di Mario, C; Francis, DP; Akashi, YJ; Davies, JE
Contributors: St Mary's Coronary Flow Trust
Publisher Information: American Heart Association
Publication Year: 2019
Collection: Imperial College London: Spiral
Subject Terms: coronary artery disease; fractional flow reserve; myocardial; hemodynamics; humans; registries; Cardiovascular System & Hematology
Subject Geographic: United States
Description: BACKGROUND: Fractional flow reserve (FFR) and instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) disagree on the hemodynamic significance of a coronary lesion in ≈20% of cases. It is unknown whether the physiological pattern of disease is an influencing factor for this. This study assessed whether the physiological pattern of coronary artery disease influences discordance between FFR and iFR measurement. METHODS AND RESULTS: Three-hundred and sixty intermediate coronary lesions (345 patients; mean age, 64.4±10.3 years; 76% men) with combined FFR, iFR, and iFR pressure-wire pullback were included for analysis from an international multicenter registry. Cut points for hemodynamic significance were FFR ≤0.80 and iFR ≤0.89, respectively. Lesions were classified into FFR+/iFR+ (n=154; 42.7%), FFR-/iFR+ (n=38; 10.6%), FFR+/iFR- (n=41; 11.4%), and FFR-/iFR- (n=127; 35.3%) groups. The physiological pattern of disease was classified according to the iFR pullback recordings as predominantly physiologically focal (n=171; 47.5%) or predominantly physiologically diffuse (n=189; 52.5%). Median FFR and iFR were 0.80 (interquartile range, 0.75-0.85) and 0.89 (interquartile range, 0.86-0.92), respectively. FFR disagreed with iFR in 22% (79 of 360). The physiological pattern of disease was the only influencing factor relating to FFR/iFR discordance: predominantly physiologically focal was significantly associated with FFR+/iFR- (58.5% [24 of 41]), and predominantly physiologically diffuse was significantly associated with FFR-/iFR+ (81.6% [31 of 38]; P
Document Type: article in journal/newspaper
Language: English
Relation: Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions; http://hdl.handle.net/10044/1/70335; https://dx.doi.org/10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.118.007494; Nil
DOI: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.118.007494
Availability: http://hdl.handle.net/10044/1/70335; https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.118.007494
Rights: © 2019 The Authors. Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions is published on behalf of the American Heart Association, Inc., by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided that the original work is properly cited.
Accession Number: edsbas.F2B18373
Database: BASE