Original ArticleIntegrated Coronary Physiology in Percutaneous Intervention: A new paradigm in interventional cardiology
Introduction
Coronary angiography has done much to improve our understanding of coronary artery disease providing an unrivalled appreciation of coronary anatomy. Indeed it is the cornerstone for determining the presence and extent of coronary artery disease. Following Gruenzigs’ first percutaneous balloon angioplasty in 1977 the growth of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with the use of stents has been exponential. Figures from Europe show that the number of stents implanted increased from 3000 in 1992, to 777,000 in 2004 [1]. However, despite a reduced mortality in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) [2] the use of PCI in patients with stable coronary disease has not been associated with a similar mortality advantage, but has been shown to improve symptoms of angina compared with optimal medical therapy alone [3]. Such equivocal results may be ascribed to the inherent subjectivity that coronary angiography provides in determining the severity of coronary stenoses, with significant inter and intra-observer variability between reporting physicians [4], [5], and that angiography does not provide complete information on the haemodynamic significance of a stenosis. Recent guidelines recommend the demonstration of ischaemia prior to stenting in elective, stable patient subgroups [6]. However, decisions to revascularise lesions are largely based on coronary angiography alone without reference to the physiological importance of the lesion with prior non-invasive testing [7]. This can result in inappropriate stent implantation with potentially morbid complications [8]. The severity of a lesion and its haemodynamic impact is determined primarily by the severity of the stenosis, however other factors such as lesion length are also important [9]. There are many different methods that can be employed to evaluate lesion severity including non-invasive investigations such as exercise stress tests, myocardial perfusion scans, and the emerging coronary computed tomography (CT) as well as invasive assessments such as intravascular ultrasound and pressure derived methods that include fractional flow reserve.
This review will examine the evidence and clinical utility for the use of assessment of fractional flow reserve (FFR), a validated invasive physiological tool that accurately determines lesion severity at the time of coronary angiography and discuss its role in specific patient populations.
Section snippets
Coronary Angiography – “A Shadow of the Truth”
Autopsy and intravascular ultrasound studies have demonstrated the shortcomings of coronary angiography in determining extent of atherosclerotic disease [10]. Coronary arteries are three-dimensional structures and fluoroscopic coronary angiography only provides a planar silhouette of the contrast filled lumen. The coronary angiographic severity of lesions is also described in relation to a distal ‘normal’ reference segment [11]. Necropsy studies have demonstrated that in patients with
Fractional Flow Reserve
With the potential but real complications of unnecessary PCI, being certain of a lesions need for revascularisation assumes significant importance. To be able to assess this at the time of coronary angiography is highly advantageous. Gould has made a significant contribution to our understanding of coronary physiology by demonstrating that resting myocardial blood flow remains normal until an epicardial stenosis reaches ≥85% and that hyperaemic blood flow reduces with a >50% stenosis [15].
Measuring Fractional Flow Reserve (FFR) in the Cath Lab (Figs. 2 and 3)
FFR is a simple cath lab based tool whose technique shares similar characteristics to percutaneous intervention and as such should only be undertaken by interventional cardiologists who have undergone the necessary training.
Validation of Fractional Flow Reserve (FFR)
Following initial exploratory work in animal models [22], numerous clinical studies comparing FFR with non-invasive stress tests established an ischaemic FFR threshold of ≤0.75 [23], [24]. Pijls and colleagues looked at 41 consecutive patents with an intermediate lesion on coronary angiography and compared FFR with exercise bicycle stress testing, dobutamine stress echocardiography and thallium scintigraphy [23]. All patents with an FFR value ≤0.75 demonstrated reversible myocardial ischaemia
Outcomes with Fractional Flow Reserve (FFR) Guided Strategy
The first major randomised trial to use FFR values to determine treatment strategy was the DEFER (deferral vs performance of PCI of non-ischaemia-producing stenoses) trial [28]. The study looked at a group of 325 patients who were scheduled to undergo elective PCI of an intermediate lesion without prior stress testing. All patients underwent FFR evaluation. If FFR was ≥0.75 the patients were randomised to deferral vs performance of PCI. The five-year results of this landmark study were
Post MI/scar
In the acute phases of an acute myocardial infarction, oedema and capillary plugging can limit the recruitable hyperaemic response of the microcirculation. This can theoretically lead to falsely elevated FFR values in the acute myocardial infarction setting and so FFR values early in the course of an AMI need to be interpreted carefully. More remotely, De Bruyne and colleagues looked at the impact of FFR on patients who had previously had an AMI ≥ six days ago [25]. They demonstrated that FFR
Left Main Stem Disease
Reliable evaluation of left main stenoses is often difficult with the consequences of mislabelling severity potentially disastrous. Although no randomised data are available, prospective single centre studies have shown the usefulness of FFR in this population. In patients with intermediate or equivocal left main lesions and an FFR value of ≥0.8, medical treatment rather than surgical revascularisation was safe and associated with a similar prognosis to patients who had been revascularised for
Conclusion
We can clearly see that utilising FFR in PCI, particularly when encountering intermediate lesions, leads to improved patient selection. In order to determine the ischaemic significance of a lesion, using an FFR ischaemic threshold of ≤0.8 has been shown to be associated with improved patient outcomes and is more cost effective when compared solely to an angiographic driven strategy. Increasing integration of coronary physiology into the cath lab will lead to better decision making by guiding
References (37)
- et al.
Comparison of quantitative coronary angiography to visual estimates of lesion severity pre and post PTCA
Am Heart J
(1990) - et al.
ACCF/SCAI/STS/AATS/AHA/ASNC 2009 Appropriateness Criteria for Coronary Revascularization: a report by the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriateness Criteria Task Force, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Thoracic Surgeons, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, American Heart Association, and the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology Endorsed by the American Society of Echocardiography, the Heart Failure Society of America, and the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography
J Am Coll Cardiol
(2009) - et al.
Late angiographic stent thrombosis (LAST) events with drug-eluting stents
J Am Coll Cardiol
(2005) - et al.
Effect of lesion length on fractional flow reserve in intermediate coronary lesions
Am Heart J
(2005) - et al.
Assessment of intermediate severity coronary lesions in the catheterization laboratory
J Am Coll Cardiol
(2007) - et al.
Current concepts of integrated coronary physiology in the catheterization laboratory
J Am Coll Cardiol
(2010) - et al.
Impact of coronary artery remodeling on clinical presentation of coronary artery disease: an intravascular ultrasound study
J Am Coll Cardiol
(2001) - et al.
Physiologic basis for assessing critical coronary stenosis. Instantaneous flow response and regional distribution during coronary hyperemia as measures of coronary flow reserve
Am J Cardiol
(1974) - et al.
Quantification of recruitable coronary collateral blood flow in conscious humans and its potential to predict future ischemic events
J Am Coll Cardiol
(1995) - et al.
From research to clinical practice: current role of intracoronary physiologically based decision making in the cardiac catheterization laboratory
J Am Coll Cardiol
(1997)
Fractional flow reserve and myocardial perfusion imaging in patients with angiographic multivessel coronary artery disease
JACC Cardiovasc Interv
Usefulness of fractional flow reserve for risk stratification of patients with multivessel coronary artery disease and an intermediate stenosis
Am J Cardiol
Fractional flow reserve: critical review of an important physiologic adjunct to angiography
Am Heart J
Physiologic assessment of jailed side branch lesions using fractional flow reserve
J Am Coll Cardiol
Percutaneous coronary interventions in Europe: prevalence, numerical estimates, and projections based on data up to 2004
Clin Res Cardiol
A comparison of pharmacologic therapy with/without timely coronary intervention vs. primary percutaneous intervention early after ST-elevation myocardial infarction: the WEST (Which Early ST-elevation myocardial infarction Therapy) study
Eur Heart J
Optimal medical therapy with or without PCI for stable coronary disease
N Engl J Med
Variability in the analysis of coronary arteriograms
Circulation
Cited by (3)
The resting status of the coronary microcirculation is a predictor of microcirculatory function following elective PCI for stable angina
2013, International Journal of CardiologyCitation Excerpt :Three milliliters (mL) of room temperature saline were injected intracoronary to produce 3 reproducible and consistent thermodilution curves and derive the hyperemic transit time (TmnHyp). Fractional flow reserve (FFR) was defined as the mean distal coronary pressure divided by the mean aortic pressure during hyperemia [12]. Care was taken to ensure that the distal sensor was in the same position between measurements to avoid errors in transit time acquisition.
A Brief History of Intracoronary Imaging
2020, Current Cardiovascular Imaging ReportsAssessment of fractional flow reserve in patients with recent Non-ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: Comparative study with 3-T stress perfusion cardiac magnetic resonance imaging
2015, Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions