Cargando…

Resting Full-Cycle Ratio versus Fractional Flow Reserve: A SWEDEHEART-Registry-Based Comparison of Two Physiological Indexes for Assessing Coronary Stenosis Severity

The adenosine-requiring physiological index fractional flow reserve (FFR) is the gold-standard method for determining the significance of intermediate lesions, while the resting full-cycle ratio (RFR) is a novel nonhyperaemic index without the need for adenosine administration. The aim of this study...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Malmberg, Stephen, Lauermann, Jörg, Karlström, Patric, Gulin, Dario, Barmano, Neshro
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10325873/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37427088
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2023/6461691
_version_ 1785069309153771520
author Malmberg, Stephen
Lauermann, Jörg
Karlström, Patric
Gulin, Dario
Barmano, Neshro
author_facet Malmberg, Stephen
Lauermann, Jörg
Karlström, Patric
Gulin, Dario
Barmano, Neshro
author_sort Malmberg, Stephen
collection PubMed
description The adenosine-requiring physiological index fractional flow reserve (FFR) is the gold-standard method for determining the significance of intermediate lesions, while the resting full-cycle ratio (RFR) is a novel nonhyperaemic index without the need for adenosine administration. The aim of this study was to investigate the degree of concordance between RFR and FFR in indicating the need for revascularisation in patients with intermediate coronary lesions. This was a retrospective, registry-based study utilising data from the SWEDEHEART registry. Patients treated at Ryhov County Hospital in Jönköping, Sweden, between the 1(st) of January 2020 and the 30(th) of September 2021, were included. The degree of correlation and concordance between RFR and FFR was determined, both when used with a single cut-off (significant stenosis if RFR ≤0.89) and with a hybrid approach (significant stenosis if RFR ≤0.85, not significant if RFR ≥0.94, and FFR measurement when RFR was in the grey zone 0.86–0.93). The study population consisted of 143 patients with 200 lesions. The overall correlation between FFR and RFR was significant (r = 0.715, R(2) = 0.511, p ≤ 0.01). A strong correlation was seen for lesions in the left anterior descending artery (LAD) and the left circumflex artery (LCX) (r = 0.748 and 0.742, respectively, both p ≤ 0.01), while the correlation in the right coronary artery (RCA) was moderate (r = 0.524, p ≤ 0.01). The overall concordance between FFR and RFR using a single cut-off was 79.0%. With a hybrid cut-off approach, the degree of concordance was 91%, with no need of adenosine in 50.5% of the lesions. In conclusion, there was a strong correlation and a high degree of concordance between FFR and RFR in determining the significance of a stenosis. The use of a hybrid approach could improve the identification of physiologically significant stenoses while minimising the use of adenosine.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10325873
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Hindawi
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-103258732023-07-07 Resting Full-Cycle Ratio versus Fractional Flow Reserve: A SWEDEHEART-Registry-Based Comparison of Two Physiological Indexes for Assessing Coronary Stenosis Severity Malmberg, Stephen Lauermann, Jörg Karlström, Patric Gulin, Dario Barmano, Neshro J Interv Cardiol Research Article The adenosine-requiring physiological index fractional flow reserve (FFR) is the gold-standard method for determining the significance of intermediate lesions, while the resting full-cycle ratio (RFR) is a novel nonhyperaemic index without the need for adenosine administration. The aim of this study was to investigate the degree of concordance between RFR and FFR in indicating the need for revascularisation in patients with intermediate coronary lesions. This was a retrospective, registry-based study utilising data from the SWEDEHEART registry. Patients treated at Ryhov County Hospital in Jönköping, Sweden, between the 1(st) of January 2020 and the 30(th) of September 2021, were included. The degree of correlation and concordance between RFR and FFR was determined, both when used with a single cut-off (significant stenosis if RFR ≤0.89) and with a hybrid approach (significant stenosis if RFR ≤0.85, not significant if RFR ≥0.94, and FFR measurement when RFR was in the grey zone 0.86–0.93). The study population consisted of 143 patients with 200 lesions. The overall correlation between FFR and RFR was significant (r = 0.715, R(2) = 0.511, p ≤ 0.01). A strong correlation was seen for lesions in the left anterior descending artery (LAD) and the left circumflex artery (LCX) (r = 0.748 and 0.742, respectively, both p ≤ 0.01), while the correlation in the right coronary artery (RCA) was moderate (r = 0.524, p ≤ 0.01). The overall concordance between FFR and RFR using a single cut-off was 79.0%. With a hybrid cut-off approach, the degree of concordance was 91%, with no need of adenosine in 50.5% of the lesions. In conclusion, there was a strong correlation and a high degree of concordance between FFR and RFR in determining the significance of a stenosis. The use of a hybrid approach could improve the identification of physiologically significant stenoses while minimising the use of adenosine. Hindawi 2023-06-29 /pmc/articles/PMC10325873/ /pubmed/37427088 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2023/6461691 Text en Copyright © 2023 Stephen Malmberg et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Malmberg, Stephen
Lauermann, Jörg
Karlström, Patric
Gulin, Dario
Barmano, Neshro
Resting Full-Cycle Ratio versus Fractional Flow Reserve: A SWEDEHEART-Registry-Based Comparison of Two Physiological Indexes for Assessing Coronary Stenosis Severity
title Resting Full-Cycle Ratio versus Fractional Flow Reserve: A SWEDEHEART-Registry-Based Comparison of Two Physiological Indexes for Assessing Coronary Stenosis Severity
title_full Resting Full-Cycle Ratio versus Fractional Flow Reserve: A SWEDEHEART-Registry-Based Comparison of Two Physiological Indexes for Assessing Coronary Stenosis Severity
title_fullStr Resting Full-Cycle Ratio versus Fractional Flow Reserve: A SWEDEHEART-Registry-Based Comparison of Two Physiological Indexes for Assessing Coronary Stenosis Severity
title_full_unstemmed Resting Full-Cycle Ratio versus Fractional Flow Reserve: A SWEDEHEART-Registry-Based Comparison of Two Physiological Indexes for Assessing Coronary Stenosis Severity
title_short Resting Full-Cycle Ratio versus Fractional Flow Reserve: A SWEDEHEART-Registry-Based Comparison of Two Physiological Indexes for Assessing Coronary Stenosis Severity
title_sort resting full-cycle ratio versus fractional flow reserve: a swedeheart-registry-based comparison of two physiological indexes for assessing coronary stenosis severity
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10325873/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37427088
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2023/6461691
work_keys_str_mv AT malmbergstephen restingfullcycleratioversusfractionalflowreserveaswedeheartregistrybasedcomparisonoftwophysiologicalindexesforassessingcoronarystenosisseverity
AT lauermannjorg restingfullcycleratioversusfractionalflowreserveaswedeheartregistrybasedcomparisonoftwophysiologicalindexesforassessingcoronarystenosisseverity
AT karlstrompatric restingfullcycleratioversusfractionalflowreserveaswedeheartregistrybasedcomparisonoftwophysiologicalindexesforassessingcoronarystenosisseverity
AT gulindario restingfullcycleratioversusfractionalflowreserveaswedeheartregistrybasedcomparisonoftwophysiologicalindexesforassessingcoronarystenosisseverity
AT barmanoneshro restingfullcycleratioversusfractionalflowreserveaswedeheartregistrybasedcomparisonoftwophysiologicalindexesforassessingcoronarystenosisseverity