+ Site Statistics
References:
54,258,434
Abstracts:
29,560,870
PMIDs:
28,072,757
+ Search Articles
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ PDF Full Text
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Diastolic fractional flow reserve to assess the functional severity of moderate coronary artery stenoses: comparison with fractional flow reserve and coronary flow velocity reserve



Diastolic fractional flow reserve to assess the functional severity of moderate coronary artery stenoses: comparison with fractional flow reserve and coronary flow velocity reserve



Circulation 102(19): 2365-2370



Background-Coronary blood flow occurs mainly during the diastolic phase of each cardiac cycle and is mainly dependent on diastolic driving pressure, especially in the left anterior descending coronary artery (LAD). We hypothesized that calculation of the ratio of the diastolic driving pressure of a stenotic LAD to its normal value, namely diastolic FFR (d-FFR), might provide precise insight into the mechanism of FFR for assessment of the functional severity of the stenosis. We compared d-FFR with FFR, coronary flow reserve (CFR), and exercise myocardial thallium scintigraphy in an lesion of intermediate severity. Methods and Results-The study population consisted of 46 consecutive patients with a moderate stenosis in the LAD in whom simultaneous measurements of aortic pressure, left ventricular pressure, and coronary pressure distal to the stenosis were obtained. Coronary flow velocity was successfully measured with a Doppler guidewire in 37 of the 46 patients. Values for FFR, d-FFR, and CFR in the noninvasive test-positive group were significantly lower than those in the negative group. With cutoff values of 0.75, 0.76, and 2.0 for FFR, d-FFR, and CFR, sensitivities were 83.3%, 95.8%, and 88.2% and specificities were 100%, 100%, and 95.0%, respectively. Conclusions-The close similarity of the sensitivity and specificity of FFR and d-FFR, around almost identical cutoff values (0.75 versus 0.76), confirms the physiological validity of FFR as a clinical standard. In clinical practice, FFR remains the index of choice for assessment of the functional severity of moderate coronary artery stenoses.

(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 010457146

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 11067790

DOI: 10.1161/01.cir.102.19.2365


Related references

Impact of Right Atrial Pressure on Fractional Flow Reserve Measurements: Comparison of Fractional Flow Reserve and Myocardial Fractional Flow Reserve in 1,600 Coronary Stenoses. Jacc. Cardiovascular Interventions 9(5): 453-459, 2016

Comparison between non-invasive coronary flow reserve and fractional flow reserve to assess the functional significance of left anterior descending artery stenosis of intermediate severity. Journal of the American Society of Echocardiography 24(4): 374-381, 2011

Coronary flow velocity reserve in three major coronary arteries by transthoracic echocardiography for the functional assessment of coronary artery disease: a comparison with fractional flow reserve. European Heart Journal Cardiovascular Imaging 15(4): 399-408, 2015

Physiological basis and long-term clinical outcome of discordance between fractional flow reserve and coronary flow velocity reserve in coronary stenoses of intermediate severity. Circulation. Cardiovascular Interventions 7(3): 301-311, 2015

Accuracy and usefulness of noninvasive fractional flow reserve from computed tomographic coronary angiography: comparison with myocardial perfusion imaging, echocardiographic coronary flow reserve, and invasive fractional flow reserve. Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics 32(1): 66-71, 2015

Measurement of fractional flow reserve to assess the functional severity of coronary-artery stenoses. New England Journal of Medicine 334(26): 1703-1708, 1996

Rationale and design of the Fractional Flow Reserve versus Angiography for Multivessel Evaluation (FAME) 3 Trial: a comparison of fractional flow reserve-guided percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass graft surgery in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease. American Heart Journal 170(4): 619-626.E2, 2015

Fractional flow reserve versus stress test to assess the functional severity of moderate coronary artery stenosis. Journal of the American College of Cardiology 37(2 Supplement A): 12A, 2001

Comparison between the flow velocity Pressure gradient relation and the coronary and fractional flow reserve in the assessment of coronary stenoses. Journal of the American College of Cardiology 41(6 Supplement A): 272A, March 19, 2003

Clinical Outcomes and Cost-Effectiveness of Fractional Flow Reserve-Guided Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With Stable Coronary Artery Disease: Three-Year Follow-Up of the FAME 2 Trial (Fractional Flow Reserve Versus Angiography for Multivessel Evaluation). Circulation 137(5): 480-487, 2017

Simultaneous coronary pressure and flow velocity measurements in human: Feasibility, reproducibility, and hemodynamic dependence of coronary flow velocity reserve, hyperemic flow versus pressure slope index, and fractional flow reserve. Circulation 94(8): 1842-1849, 1996

Fractional flow reserve, absolute and relative coronary blood flow velocity reserve in relation to the results of technetium-99m sestamibi single-photon emission computed tomography in patients with two-vessel coronary artery disease. Journal of the American College of Cardiology 37(5): 1316-1322, 2001

Comparison of adenosine magnetic resonance perfusion imaging with invasive coronary flow reserve and fractional flow reserve in patients with suspected coronary artery disease. International Journal of Cardiology 147(1): 184-186, 2011

Conflicting haemodynamic evaluation of intermediate coronary lesions by comparison of fractional flow reserve and blood flow velocity reserve. European Heart Journal 20(ABSTR SUPPL ): 475, 1999

Fractional Flow Reserve and Cardiac Events in Coronary Artery Disease: Data From a Prospective IRIS-FFR Registry (Interventional Cardiology Research Incooperation Society Fractional Flow Reserve). Circulation 135(23): 2241-2251, 2017