Search

Competing Interests: The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Joost Daemen received institutional grant/research support from Abbott Vascular, ACIST Medical, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, Microport, Pie Medical, and ReCor Medical, and consultancy and speaker fees from Abbott, Abiomed, ACIST medical, Boston Scientific, CardiacBooster, Cardialysis BV, Kaminari Medical, Medtronic, ReCor Medical, Pie Medical, PulseCath, and Siemens Health Care. Nicolas van Mieghem received institutional research grant support from Abbott Vascular, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Daiichi Sankyo, Edwards Lifesciences, and Medtronic, and consultancy fees from Abbott, Abiomed, Amgen, Anteris, Boston Scientific, Daiichi Sankyo, JenaValve, Medtronic, PulseCath BV, and Teleflex. Tara Neleman has received institutional grant support from ACIST Medical Systems. The remaining authors report no relationships that could be construed as a conflict of interest.

Background: In January 2021, the Diamondback 360 orbital atherectomy (OA) system received CE mark approval and became available in Europe. The first procedure in Europe was performed at the Thoraxcenter, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands., Aims: To report the procedural safety and efficacy of the initial experience with OA in a tertiary care institution in the Netherlands., Methods: Patients with de novo severely calcified coronary artery disease who were treated with intended invasive imaging-guided OA were included in a prospective single-centre registry. Device success, defined as less than 50% stenosis after OA, and procedural success, defined as successful stent implantation with less than 50% residual stenosis, were evaluated. Calcium debulking effects were assessed by invasive imaging. Safety was assessed up to 30 days after the index procedure., Results: Between February 2021 and June 2021, 29 patients with a total of 39 coronary arteries underwent OA. Target lesions were heavily calcified with a mean length of 32 mm and a calcium arc of 320 degrees. Invasive imaging was applied in all but one patient and 36 vessels. Superficial sanding was observed in almost all vessels (90%) and fracturing of deeper medial calcium in more than half of the vessels (63%), with a device success of 66% and procedural success of 94%. The mean stent symmetry index was 0.84, indicating good circular stent expansion. No primary safety events occurred during 30 days of follow-up., Conclusion: Our initial experience with OA for heavily calcified coronary lesions demonstrated favourable debulking effects and plaque modification, with high procedural success and clinical safety., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background: In order to facilitate fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guided lesion assessment, several 3-dimensional (3D)-angiography-based physiological indices have been recently validated. Thus far, limited data are available on the association of these indices with conventional forms of ischemia testing., Aim: The aim of the study was to determine the association between 3D-angiography-based vessel-FFR (vFFR) and myocardial ischemia as assessed by exercise electrocardiography (ECG) testing, dobutamine stress echocardiography, single photon emission computed tomography myocardial perfusion imaging (SPECTMPI), and stress cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging (stress CMR)., Methods: FAST ISCHEMIA is a retrospective, single-center cohort study including patients who underwent non-invasive myocardial ischemia testing and subsequent coronary angiography (≤3 months). A total of 145 patients (340 vessels) were analyzed. The overall patient-based sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), positive likelihood ratio (LR+), and negative likelihood ratio (LR-) of vFFR ≤0.80 in any vessel for ischemia was 64% (95% confidence interval [CI], 53-74), 71% (95% CI, 54-84), 83% (95% CI, 72-91), 46% (95% CI, 33-60), 2.16 (95% CI, 1.25-3.74), and 0.52 (95% CI, 0.36-0.74), respectively. Multivariable logistic regression showed that vFFR ≤0.80 was significantly associated with ischemia on a patient level (odds ratio, 8.13; 95% CI, 2.51-30.06; P<.001) and on a vascular territory level (odds ratio, 2.75; 95% CI, 1.17-6.44; P<.01)., Conclusion: Our study suggests that vFFR ≤0.80 has a modest association with non-invasive myocardial ischemia testing using either exercise ECG or stress imaging modalities. After correcting for independent confounders, vFFR was independently associated with ischemia on a non-invasive myocardial ischemia detection test.

Background: Vessel fractional flow reserve (vFFR) has a high diagnostic accuracy in assessing functional lesion significance compared with FFR. Nonhyperemic pressure ratios (NHPRs) were noninferior to FFR to guide revascularization of intermediate lesions. Therefore, the diagnostic performance of vFFR compared with NHPR warrants interest., Aim: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of vFFR with a generic diastolic pressure ratio (dPR) as a reference., Methods: The study population was derived from the FAST EXTEND and FAST II studies. Between January 2016 and September 2020, a total of 475 patients were enrolled., Results: Median dPR was 0.92 (interquartile range [IQR], 0.87-0.95), median vFFR was 0.86 (IQR, 0.80-0.90). The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and diagnostic accuracy of vFFR ≤0.80 for dPR ≤0.89 were 66%, 92%, 79%, 85%, and 84%, respectively. Vessel FFR showed a good agreement with dPR (r=0.68), consistent among specific clinical lesion subsets and a high diagnostic accuracy for dPR ≤0.89 (area under the curve=0.89). Discordance between vFFR and dPR was observed in 78/492 cases (15.6%) and logistic regression analysis did not reveal any clinical, angiographic, or hemodynamic variables associated with vFFR and dPR discordance., Conclusion: Vessel FFR shows a good agreement with dPR and a high diagnostic accuracy for dPR ≤0.89.

Background: Post-percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) fractional flow reserve (FFR) <0.90 is common and has been related to impaired patient outcome., Objectives: The authors sought to evaluate if PCI optimization directed by intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) in patients with post-PCI FFR <0.90 could improve 1-year target vessel failure (TVF) rates., Methods: In this single-center, randomized, double-blind trial, patients with a post-PCI FFR <0.90 at the time of angiographically successful PCI were randomized to IVUS-guided optimization or the standard of care (control arm). The primary endpoint was TVF (a composite of cardiac death, spontaneous target vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically driven target vessel revascularization) at 1 year., Results: A total of 291 patients with post-PCI FFR <0.90 were randomized (IVUS-guided optimization arm: n = 145/152 vessels, control arm: n = 146/157 vessels). The mean post-PCI FFR was 0.84 ± 0.05. A total of 104 (68.4%) vessels in the IVUS-guided optimization arm underwent additional optimization including additional stenting (34.9%) or postdilatation only (33.6%), resulting in a mean increase in post-PCI FFR in these vessels from 0.82 ± 0.06 to 0.85 ± 0.05 (P < 0.001) and a post-PCI FFR ≥0.90 in 20% of the vessels. The 1-year TVF rate was comparable between the 2 study arms (IVUS-guided optimization arm: 4.2%, control arm: 4.8%; P = 0.79). There was a trend toward a lower incidence of clinically driven target vessel revascularization in the IVUS-guided optimization arm (0.7% vs. 4.2%, P = 0.06)., Conclusions: IVUS-guided post-PCI FFR optimization significantly improved post-PCI FFR. Because of lower-than-expected event rates, post-PCI FFR optimization did not significantly lower TVF at the 1-year follow-up., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures The Erasmus Medical Center received institutional research support from ACIST Medical Systems, Inc. Dr Diletti has received institutional research grant support from ACIST Medical Systems, Inc. Dr Van Mieghem has received institutional research grant support from Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Daiichi-Sankyo, PulseCath BV, and Abiomed. Dr Daemen has received institutional grant/research support from AstraZeneca, Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, ACIST Medical Systems, Inc, Medtronic, Pie Medical, and ReCor medical. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is superior to angiography-guided PCI. The clinical uptake of FFR has been limited, however, by the need to advance a wire in the coronary artery, the additional time required and the need for hyperaemic agents which can cause patient discomfort. FFR derived from routine coronary angiography eliminates these issues., Aims: The aim of this study was to assess the diagnostic performance and accuracy of three-dimensional quantitative coronary angiography (3D-QCA)-based vessel FFR (vFFR) compared to pressure wire-based FFR (≤0.80)., Methods: The FAST II (Fast Assessment of STenosis severity) study was a prospective observational multicentre study designed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of vFFR compared to the reference standard (pressure wire-based FFR ≤0.80). A total of 334 patients from six centres were enrolled. Both site-determined and blinded independent core lab vFFR measurements were compared to FFR., Results: The core lab vFFR was 0.83±0.09 and pressure wire-based FFR 0.83±0.08. A good correlation was found between core lab vFFR and pressure wire-based FFR (R=0.74; p<0.001; mean bias 0.0029±0.0642). vFFR had an excellent diagnostic accuracy in identifying lesions with an invasive wire-based FFR ≤0.80 (area under the curve [AUC] 0.93; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.90-0.96; p<0.001). Positive predictive value, negative predictive value, diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of vFFR were 90%, 90%, 90%, 81% and 95%, respectively., Conclusions: 3D-QCA-based vFFR has excellent diagnostic performance to detect FFR ≤0.80. The study was registered on clinicaltrials.gov under identifier NCT03791320.

Objectives: To evaluate the feasibility of three-vessel three-dimensional (3D) quantitative coronary angiography (QCA)-based fractional flow reserve (FFR) computation in patients discussed within the Heart Team in whom the treatment decision was based on angiography alone, and to evaluate the concordance between 3D QCA-based vessel FFR (vFFR)-confirmed functional lesion significance and revascularisation strategy as proposed by the Heart Team., Design: Retrospective, cohort., Setting: 3D QCA-based FFR indices have not yet been evaluated in the context of Heart Team decision-making; consecutive patients from six institutions were screened for eligibility and three-vessel vFFR was computed by blinded analysts., Participants: Consecutive patients with chronic coronary syndrome or unstable angina referred for Heart Team consultation. Exclusion criteria involved: presentation with acute myocardial infarction (MI), significant valve disease, left ventricle ejection fraction <30%, inadequate quality of angiogram precluding vFFR computation in all three epicardial coronary arteries (ie, absence of a minimum of two angiographic projections with views of at least 30° apart, substantial foreshortening/overlap of the vessel, poor contrast medium injection, ostial lesions, chronic total occlusions)., Primary and Secondary Outcome Measures: Discordance between vFFR-confirmed lesion significance and revascularisation was assessed as the primary outcome measure. Rates of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) defined as cardiac death, MI and clinically driven revascularisation were reported., Results: Of a total of 1003 patients were screened for eligibility, 416 patients (age 65.6±10.6, 71.2% male, 53% stable angina) were included. The most important reason for screening failure was insufficient quality of the angiogram (43%). Discordance between vFFR confirmed lesion significance and revascularisation was found in 124/416 patients (29.8%) corresponding to 149 vessels (46/149 vessels (30.9%) were reclassified as significant and 103/149 vessels (69.1%) as non-significant by vFFR). Over a median of 962 days, the cumulative incidence of MACE was 29.7% versus 18.5% in discordant versus concordant patients (p=0.031)., Conclusions: vFFR computation is feasible in around 40% of the patients referred for Heart Team discussion, a limitation that is mostly based on insufficient quality of the angiogram. Three vessel vFFR screening indicated discordance between vFFR confirmed lesion significance and revascularisation in 29.8% of the patients., Competing Interests: Competing interests: MT acknowledges funding as the laureate of the European Society of Cardiology Research and Training Program in the form of the ESC 2018 Grant. KM received institutional grant support from Acist Medical. LJCvZ received institutional research grant support from Acist Medical. NMVM received research grant support from Edwards, Medtronic, Abbott, Boston Scientific, Pulse Cath, Acist Medical and Essential Medical. JD received institutional grant/research support from Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, Acist Medical, Medtronic and PulseCath, and consultancy and speaker fees from Acist medical, Boston Scientific, ReCor Medical, Medtronic and Pulse Cath. The remaining authors have nothing to disclose., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

3D coronary angiography-based vessel fractional flow reserve (vFFR) proved to be an accurate diagnostic alternative to invasively measured pressure wire based fractional flow reserve (FFR). The ability to compute post-PCI vFFR using pre-PCI vFFR virtual stent analysis is unknown. We aimed to assess the feasibility and diagnostic accuracy of pre-PCI vFFR virtual stenting analysis (residual vFFR) with post-PCI FFR as a reference. This is an observational, single-center retrospective cohort study including consecutive patients from the FFR-SEARCH registry. We blindly calculated residual vFFR from pre-PCI angiograms and compared them to invasive pressure-wire based post-PCI FFR. Inclusion criteria involved presentation with either stable or unstable angina or non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), ≥1 significant stenosis in one of the epicardial coronary arteries (percentage diameter stenosis of >70% by QCA or hemodynamically relevant stenosis with FFR ≤0.80) and pre procedural angiograms eligible for vFFR analysis. Exclusion criteria comprised patients with ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), coronary bypass grafts, cardiogenic shock or severe hemodynamic instability. Eighty-one pre-PCI residual vFFR measurements were compared to post-PCI FFR and post-PCI vFFR measurements. Mean residual vFFR was 0.91 ± 0.06, mean post-PCI FFR 0.91 ± 0.06 and mean post-PCI vFFR was 0.92 ± 0.05. Residual vFFR showed a high linear correlation (r = 0.84) and good agreement (mean difference (95% confidence interval): 0.005 (−0.002−0.012)) with post-PCI FFR, as well as with post-PCI-vFFR (r = 0.77, mean difference −0.007 (−0.015−0.0003)). Residual vFFR showed good accuracy in the identification of lesions with post-PCI FFR < 0.90 (sensitivity 94%, specificity 71%, area under the curve (AUC) 0.93 (95% CI: 0.86−0.99), p < 0.001). Virtual stenting using vFFR provided an accurate estimation of post-PCI FFR and post-PCI vFFR. Further studies are needed to prospectively validate a vFFR-guided PCI strategy.

[Figure: see text].

Background: Treatment preferences in patients with left main (LM) stem disease and no prior revascularization are unknown. The objectives of this study were to determine (i) patient-reported importance ratings of particular features related to percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery, (ii) how these features determine treatment preference, and (iii) how educational and psychosocial background influence this preference., Methods: In this prospective, multicenter study a total of 500 patients without previous revascularization who underwent diagnostic angiography for suspected coronary disease were asked to complete a case-vignette on a (hypothetical) LM stenosis qualifying for both PCI and CABG, in addition to 6 validated questionnaires to assess the influence of psychosocial factors on treatment preference., Results: Overall, 90% favored PCI over CABG because of the lower bleeding and stroke risk despite a higher likelihood for repeat revascularization. By multivariable regression, the only independent determinant of treatment preference for CABG was lower educational level (14% in low vs. 8% in higher educated patients, OR: 3.22, CI: 1.16-8.95, p=0.025) while psychosocial variables were not associated. Compared to higher educated patients, those with lower educational level suffered more from depression, anxiety, loneliness, and uncertainty., Conclusions: Overall, patients who are informed about risk and benefits of each treatment modality clearly favor PCI over CABG and particularly value lower short-term morbidity while being aware of higher risk of repeat revascularization. Lower educational level was associated with a higher prevalence of psychosomatic phenotypes and a 14% preference for CABG. Educational and psychosocial background matter in the revascularization strategy decision-making process., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background: Fractional flow reserve (FFR) is the current gold standard to determine hemodynamic severity of angiographically intermediate coronary lesions. Much less is known about the prognostic effects of FFR measured directly after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The aims of this study were to evaluate post-PCI FFR values, identify predictors for a low post-PCI FFR, and to investigate whether a relationship between postprocedural FFR and outcome during 30-day follow-up exists., Methods and Results: The FFR-SEARCH (Fractional Flow Reserve-Stent Evaluated at Rotterdam Cardiology Hospital) is a prospective registry in which FFR measurements were performed after PCI in 1000 consecutive patients. All FFR measurements were performed under maximum hyperemia with intravenous adenosine with the Navvus RXi system (ACIST Medical Systems, Eden Prairie, MN). The clinical end point was defined as a composite of death, target vessel revascularization, or nonfatal myocardial infarction at 30-day follow-up. Measurement of post-PCI FFR was successful in 959 patients (96%), and a total of 1165 lesions were assessed. There were no complications related to the microcatheter. A total of 322 ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients with 371 measured lesions were excluded leaving 637 patients with 794 measured lesions for the final analysis. Overall post-PCI FFR was 0.90±0.07. In 396 lesions (50%), post-PCI FFR was >0.90. A total of 357 patients (56%) had ≥1 lesion(s) with a post-PCI FFR ≤0.90, and 73 patients (11%) had ≥1 lesion(s) with a post-PCI FFR ≤0.80 with post-PCI FFR ≤0.80 in 78 lesions (9.8%). Complex lesion characteristics, use of multiple stents and smaller reference vessel diameter was associated with post-PCI FFR ≤0.90. During follow-up, 11 patients (1.8%) reached the clinical end point. There was no significant relationship between post-PCI FFR and the clinical end point at 30-day follow-up ( P=0.636)., Conclusions: Routine measurement of post-PCI FFR using a monorail microcatheter is safe and feasible. Several lesion and patient characteristics were associated with a low post-PCI FFR. Post-PCI FFR did not correlate with clinical events at 30 days.

Background: Fractional flow reserve (FFR) after percutaneous coronary intervention is a predictor of adverse cardiovascular events during follow-up. However, the rationale for low post procedural FFR values remains often elusive based on angiographic findings alone., Methods and Results: FFR SEARCH (Stent Evaluated at Rotterdam Cardiology Hospital) is a prospective single-center registry in which post-percutaneous coronary intervention FFR was assessed in 1000 consecutive all-comer patients. FFR measurements were performed with a microcatheter ±20 mm distal to the most distal stent edge. In 100 vessels with a post procedural FFR ≤0.85, and 20 vessels >0.85 high definition intravascular ultrasound analysis was performed. In 100 vessels with a post-percutaneous coronary intervention FFR ≤0.85, mean post procedural FFR was 0.79±0.05. Minimal lumen area was 2.19 (1.81-3.19) mm 2 , mean lumen area was 5.95 (5.01-7.03) mm 2 , and minimal stent area was 4.01 (3.09-5.21) mm 2 . Significant residual focal proximal lesions were found in 29% of the assessed vessels whereas, focal distal lesions were found in 30% of the vessels. Stent underexpansion and malapposition were found in 74% and 22% of vessels, respectively. Clear focal signs of luminal narrowing were found in 54% of the vessels analyzed. Although incidences of focal lesions, underexpansion, and malapposition were similar between both cohorts, minimal stent area was significantly smaller in vessels with a post-percutaneous coronary intervention FFR ≤0.85 as compared with those with an FFR >0.85., Conclusions: In patients with a post procedural FFR ≤0.85, intravascular ultrasound revealed focal signs of luminal narrowing in a significant number of cases.

Background: Instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) offers a reliable non-hyperemic assessment of coronary physiology but requires dedicated proprietary software with a fully automated algorithm. We hypothesized that dPR (diastolic pressure ratio), calculated with novel universal software, has a strong correlation with iFR, similar diagnostic accuracy relative to resting distal coronary artery pressure/aortic pressure and fractional flow reserve (FFR)., Methods and Results: The dPR study is an observational, retrospective, single-center cohort study including patients who underwent iFR or FFR. Dedicated software was used to calculate the dPR from Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) pressure waveforms. The flat period on the pressure difference between sample (dP) to the time difference between the same sample points (dt) signal was used to detect automatically the period, where the resistance is low and constant, and to calculate the dPR, which is an average over 5 consecutive heartbeats. The software was validated by correlating iFR results with dPR. Software validation was done by comparing 78 iFR measurements in 44 patients who underwent iFR. Mean iFR and dPR were 0.91±0.10 and 0.92±0.10, respectively, with a significant linear correlation ( R=0.997; P<0.001). Diagnostic accuracy was tested in 100 patients who underwent FFR. Mean FFR, resting distal coronary artery pressure/aortic pressure, and dPR were 0.85±0.09, 0.94±0.05, and 0.93±0.07, respectively. There was a significant linear correlation between dPR and FFR ( R=0.77; P<0.001). Both distal coronary artery pressure/aortic pressure and dPR had good diagnostic accuracy in the identification of lesions with an FFR ≤0.80 (area under the curve, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.76-0.92 and 0.86; 95% CI, 0.78-0.93, respectively)., Conclusions: dPR, calculated by a novel validated software tool, showed a strong linear correlation with iFR. dPR correlated well with FFR with a good diagnostic accuracy to identify positive FFR.

Background and Aims: Significant left main (LM) stem disease is potentially life-threatening and mandates revascularization. This study aimed to assess how patients rate the importance of particular features of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), how this determines their preference for a particular treatment strategy, and whether particular personality characteristics influence this preference., Methods and Results: In total, 1145 patients who visited the outpatient clinic of the Erasmus Medical Center for stable coronary artery disease were asked to complete a case vignette-questionnaire on a hypothetical significant LM stenosis amenable to PCI or CABG. To assess the individual's personality disposition and general distress level, each patient had to complete a set of 3 standardized, validated questionnaires with satisfactory psychometric properties. Overall 89% of patients preferred PCI to CABG. PCI was the preferred strategy despite a higher risk for repeat revascularization and need for more medication. Remarkably, the fact that a risk for repeat revascularization is more common in the PCI group is less important for the patients who opt for PCI. Risk for stroke and bleeding were the most important arguments to opt for PCI over CABG. Type D personality, depression, and anxiety were all associated with a relatively higher preference for CABG as revascularization strategy., Conclusion: Overall, when given the choice patients seem to have a clear preference for PCI over CABG and consider stroke and bleeding important procedure-related complications. Patients with Type D personality, depression, or anxiety favor CABG., (Copyright © 2018 Japanese College of Cardiology. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)