Key result
Absolute coronary blood flow reduction showed a substantial correlation with fractional flow reserve (r = 0.89), though discordance reached 38% in the FFR 'gray zone' of 0.75-0.80.
Why the study?
Although FFR is routinely used to diagnose CAD and guide treatment, how accurately it predicts actual changes in coronary blood flow remains unknown.
Does absolute coronary blood flow (aCBF) measurement correlate with and complement fractional flow reserve (FFR) in patients with ischemic heart disease?
Observational (n=143)
No
Does absolute coronary blood flow (aCBF) measurement correlate with and complement fractional flow reserve (FFR) in patients with ischemic heart disease?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Absolute coronary blood flow assessment complements FFR and reveals significant discordance in the FFR 'gray zone' (0.75-0.80), driven by microvascular resistance, vessel diameter, and myocardial mass.
Fractional flow reserve (FFR) is the current gold-standard invasive assessment of coronary artery disease (CAD). FFR reports coronary blood flow (CBF) as a fraction of a hypothetical and unknown normal value. Although used routinely to diagnose CAD and guide treatment, how accurately FFR predicts actual CBF changes remains unknown. Here we compared fractional CBF with the absolute CBF (aCBF in mL/min), measured with a computational method during standard angiography and pressure-wire assessment, on 203 diseased arteries (143 patients). We found a substantial correlation between the two measurements (r 0.89, Cohen's Kappa 0.71). Concordance between fractional and absolute CBF reduction was high when FFR was >0.80 (91%), but reduced when FFR was ≤0.80 (81%), 0.70-0.80 (68%) and, particularly 0.75-0.80 (62%). Discordance was associated with coronary microvascular resistance, vessel diameter and mass of myocardium subtended, all factors to which FFR is agnostic. Assessment of aCBF complements FFR, and may be valuable to assess CBF, particularly in cases within the FFR 'grey-zone'.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Aubinière-Robb et al. (2022) conducted an observational in Ischaemic Heart Disease (n=143). Absolute coronary blood flow (aCBF) assessment vs. Fractional flow reserve (FFR) was evaluated on Relationship (correlation) between fractional (FFR) and absolute coronary blood flow reduction (r = 0.89, p=<0.001). Absolute coronary blood flow reduction showed a substantial correlation with fractional flow reserve (r = 0.89), though discordance reached 38% in the FFR 'gray zone' of 0.75-0.80.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: