Key result
Wirecath pressure wire proves safe with 0% adverse events while eliminating coronary hydrostatic pressure errors.
Why the study?
Using a fluid-filled wire with an external pressure sensor may avoid the systematic error introduced by hydrostatic pressure within the coronary circulation.
Does a fluid-filled pressure wire safely and accurately perform intracoronary physiological measurements while avoiding hydrostatic errors compared to conventional sensor-tipped wires in patients undergoing coronary angiography?
Observational (n=45)
No
Does a fluid-filled pressure wire safely and accurately perform intracoronary physiological measurements while avoiding hydrostatic errors compared to conventional sensor-tipped wires in patients undergoing coronary angiography?
A novel fluid-filled coronary wire is safe and feasible for intracoronary pressure measurements, effectively eliminating hydrostatic measurement errors that alter resting and hyperemic indices derived from conventional sensor-tipped wires.
May help avoid coronary lesion misclassification from hydrostatic errors; hypothesis-generating and requires randomized validation before practice change.
Background. Using a fluid-filled wire with a pressure sensor outside the patient compared to a conventional pressure wire may avoid the systematic error introduced by the hydrostatic pressure within the coronary circulation. Aims. To assess the safety and effectiveness of the novel fluid-filled wire, Wirecath (Cavis Technologies, Uppsala, Sweden), as well as its ability to avoid the hydrostatic pressure error. Methods and Results. The Wirecath pressure wire was used in 45 eligible patients who underwent invasive coronary angiography and had a clinical indication for invasive coronary pressure measurement at Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden. In 29 patients, a simultaneous measurement was performed with a conventional coronary pressure wire (PressureWire X, Abbott Medical, Plymouth, MN, USA), and in 19 patients, the vertical height difference between the tip of the guide catheter and the wire measure point was measured in a 90-degree lateral angiographic projection. No adverse events caused by the pressure wires were reported. The mean Pd/Pa and mean FFR using the fluid-filled wire and the sensor-tipped wire differed significantly; however, after correcting for the hydrostatic effect, the sensor-tipped wire pressure correlated well with the fluid-filled wire pressure (R = 0.74 vs. R = 0.89 at rest and R = 0.89 vs. R = 0.98 at hyperemia). Conclusion. Hydrostatic errors in physiologic measurements can be avoided by using the fluid-filled Wirecath wire, which was safe to use in the present study. This trial is registered with NCT04776577 and NCT04802681.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Råmunddal et al. (2024) conducted an observational in Clinical indication for invasive coronary pressure measurement (n=45). Fluid-filled coronary pressure wire (Wirecath) vs. Conventional sensor-tipped coronary pressure wire (PressureWire X) was evaluated on Rate of adverse events. The fluid-filled Wirecath pressure wire was safe to use with 0% adverse events and effectively avoided systematic errors introduced by hydrostatic pressure in the coronary circulation.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: