Search

Background The management of patients with angiographically intermediate coronary lesions is a major clinical issue. Fractional flow reserve provides validated functional insights while optical coherence tomography provides high resolution anatomic imaging. Both techniques may be applied to guide management in case of angiographically intermediate coronary lesions. Moreover, these techniques may be used to optimize the result of percutaneous coronary intervention. We aim to compare the clinical and economic impact of fractional flow reserve versus optical coherence tomography guidance in patients with angiographically intermediate coronary lesions. Methods/Design Patients with at least one angiographically intermediate coronary lesion will be randomized (ratio 1:1) to fractional flow reserve or optical coherence tomography guidance. In the fractional flow reserve arm, percutaneous coronary intervention will be performed if fractional flow reserve value is ⩽0.80, and will be conducted with the aim of achieving a post-percutaneous coronary intervention fractional flow reserve target value of ⩾0.90. In the optical coherence tomography arm, percutaneous coronary intervention will be performed if percentage of area stenosis (AS%) is ⩾75% or 50 to 75% with minimal lumen area <2.5 mm2, or if a major plaque ulceration is detected. In case of percutaneous coronary intervention, optical coherence tomography will guide the procedure in order to minimize underexpansion, malapposition, and edge dissections. Cost load and clinical outcome will be prospectively assessed at one and thirteen months. The assessed clinical outcome measures will be: major cardiovascular events and occurrence of significant angina defined as a Seattle Angina Questionnaire score <90 in the angina frequency scale. Discussion The FORZA trial will provide useful guidance for the management of patients with coronary artery disease by prospectively assessing the use of two techniques representing the gold standard for functional and anatomical definition of coronary plaques. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01824030 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Contrast fractional flow reserve (cFFR) is a relatively new tool for the assessment of intermediate coronary artery stenosis and represents a reliable surrogate of FFR with the advantage of potentially simplifying functional evaluation. We aimed to compare the incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) in patients undergoing functional evaluation with both FFR and cFFR based on the results of the two indexes. We retrospectively analyzed outcomes in 488 patients who underwent functional evaluation with FFR and cFFR. Patients were divided into four groups using the cutoff values of 0.80 for FFR and 0.85 for cFFR: −/− (n = 298), +/+ (n = 134), −/+(n = 31) and +/− (n = 25). All patients were treated according to FFR value. MACE rate was assessed in each group, including death, myocardial infarction and urgent target vessel revascularization (TVR). Mean follow-up time was 22 ± 15 months. Incidence of MACE at follow-up was 8.3% in FFR−/cFFR−, 14.0% in FFR+/cFFR+, 16.0% in FFR−/cFFR+ and 8.0% in FFR+/cFFR− without a significant difference amongst the 4 groups (p = 0.2). Nevertheless, a significant difference in the rate of TVR comparing FFR−/cFFR− (n = 17) and FFR−/cFFR+ (n = 5) was found at 24 months (5.7% vs 16.0%; p = 0.027). cFFR is accurate in predicting FFR and consequently reliable in guiding coronary revascularization. In the rare case of discordance, while FFR+/cFFR- patients show a prognosis similar to FFR-/cFFR- patients, FFR-/cFFR+ patients show a prognosis similar to FFR+/cFFR+ patients. • cFFR is a new tool in the assessment of intermediate coronary stenosis. • cFFR is accurate in predicting FFR and reliable in guiding revascularization. • In case of discordance, no significant difference in outcome choosing cFFR. • In patients with FFR > 0.80 and cFFR ≤ 0.85 TVR is higher. • cFFR could be a more sensitive index. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background The decision-making process of patients with angiographically-intermediate coronary lesions (ICL) is clinically challenging and may benefit from adjunctive invasive techniques. Fractional-flow-reserve (FFR) represents the gold standard to evaluate ICL but frequency-domain optical-coherence-tomography (OCT) is a novel, promising, high resolution coronary imaging technique, which allows physiopathologic assessment of coronary plaque. We investigated the possible relation between OCT and FFR in selected ICL patients. Methods Stable or unstable patients with ICL who underwent both FFR and OCT assessment at two large tertiary centers were retrospectively enrolled. FFR was performed according to standard methodology. OCT images were (on blind to clinical and FFR results) analyzed to assess minimal lumen area (MLA), percentage area stenosis (AS), thrombus and plaque ulceration. Results Forty patients were identified (62 ± 10 years, 93% symptomatic, 35% acute presentation, 93% left-anterior-descending artery ICL). Percentage diameter stenosis at quantitative coronary angiography was 40 ± 12% and FFR was 0.85 ± 0.07. MLA ( p = 0.009), AS ( p < 0.001) and plaque ulceration ( p = 0.02) were significantly associated with FFR values. An integrated assessment of AS (≥ or < 70%), MLA (≥ or < 2.5 mm 2 ) and presence or absence of thrombus and plaque ulceration was found to have the potential to accurately (sensitivity 91%, specificity 93%) predict FFR results. Conclusion In patients with ICL, a combination of different OCT parameters may help predict FFR results. These findings suggest that only a comprehensive assessment of lesion features by OCT can allow an accurate prediction of lesion severity assessed by FFR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]