Why the study?
Does elective PCI improve coronary physiological indices differently in territories with grey-zone FFR compared to low-FFR in patients with stable angina?
Does elective PCI improve coronary physiological indices differently in territories with grey-zone FFR compared to low-FFR in patients with stable angina?
PCI in territories with grey-zone FFR (0.75-0.80) yields less improvement in coronary physiological indices compared to low-FFR territories, highlighting the potential value of combining FFR and IMR for patient selection.
FFR 0.75-0.80 decisions warrant caution in stable angina; retrospective data leaves open the link between pre-PCI FFR and post-PCI physiological change.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to investigate the association between fractional flow reserve (FFR) values and change in coronary physiological indices after elective percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). BACKGROUND: Decision making for revascularization when FFR is 0.75-0.80 is controversial. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed of 296 patients with stable angina pectoris who underwent physiological examinations before and after PCI. To investigate the differences of coronary flow improvement between territories with low-FFR (<0.75) and grey-zone FFR (0.75-0.80), serial changes in physiological indices including mean transit time (Tmn), coronary flow reserve (CFR), and index of microcirculatory resistance (IMR) were compared between these two groups. RESULTS: Compared to low-FFR territories, grey-zone FFR territories showed significantly lower prevalence of Tmn shortening, CFR improvement, and decrease in IMR (Tmn shorting, 63.9% vs. 87.0%, P < .001; CFR improvement, 63.0% vs. 75.7%, P = .019; IMR decrease, 51.3% vs. 63.3%, P = .040) and lower extent of their absolute changes (Tmn shorting, 0.06 (-0.03 to 0.16) vs. 0.22 (0.07-0.45), P < .001; CFR improvement, 0.45 (-0.32 to 1.87) vs. 1.08 (0.02-2.44), P < .01; IMR decrease, 0.2 (-44.0 to 31.3) vs. 2.9 (-2.9 to 11.8), P = .022). Multivariate analysis showed that pre-PCI IMR predicted improved coronary flow profile in both groups, whereas pre-PCI FFR predicted increased coronary flow indices in low-FFR territories. CONCLUSIONS: Worsening of physiological indices after PCI was not uncommon in territories showing grey-zone FFR. Physiological assessment combining FFR and IMR may help identify patients who may benefit by PCI, particularly those in the grey zone.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Niida et al. (2018) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: