Cargando…
ACIST-FFR Study (Assessment of Catheter-Based Interrogation and Standard Techniques for Fractional Flow Reserve Measurement)
BACKGROUND—: Measurement of fractional flow reserve (FFR) to guide coronary revascularization lags despite robust supportive data, partly because of the handling characteristics of traditional coronary pressure wires. An optical pressure-monitoring microcatheter, which can be advanced over a traditi...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5753822/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29246917 http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.117.005905 |
_version_ | 1783290326892412928 |
---|---|
author | Fearon, William F. Chambers, Jeffrey W. Seto, Arnold H. Sarembock, Ian J. Raveendran, Ganesh Sakarovitch, Charlotte Yang, Lingyao Desai, Manisha Jeremias, Allen Price, Matthew J. |
author_facet | Fearon, William F. Chambers, Jeffrey W. Seto, Arnold H. Sarembock, Ian J. Raveendran, Ganesh Sakarovitch, Charlotte Yang, Lingyao Desai, Manisha Jeremias, Allen Price, Matthew J. |
author_sort | Fearon, William F. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND—: Measurement of fractional flow reserve (FFR) to guide coronary revascularization lags despite robust supportive data, partly because of the handling characteristics of traditional coronary pressure wires. An optical pressure-monitoring microcatheter, which can be advanced over a traditional coronary guidewire, facilitates FFR assessment but may underestimate pressure wire–derived FFR. METHODS AND RESULTS—: In this prospective, multicenter trial, 169 patients underwent FFR assessment with a pressure wire alone and with a pressure microcatheter over the pressure wire. An independent core laboratory performed quantitative coronary angiography and evaluated all pressure tracings. The primary end point was the bias or difference between the microcatheter FFR and the pressure wire FFR, as assessed by Bland–Altman analysis. The mean difference between the microcatheter and the pressure wire–derived FFR values was −0.022 (95% confidence interval, −0.029 to −0.015). On multivariable analysis, reference vessel diameter (P=0.027) and lesion length (P=0.044) were independent predictors of bias between the 2 FFR measurements. When the microcatheter FFR was added to this model, it was the only independent predictor of bias (P<0.001). The mean FFR value from the microcatheter was significantly lower than from the pressure wire (0.81 versus 0.83; P<0.001). In 3% of cases (95% confidence interval, 1.3%–6.7%), there was clinically meaningful diagnostic discordance, with the FFR from the pressure wire >0.80 and that from the microcatheter <0.75. These findings were similar when including all 210 patients with site-reported paired FFR data. CONCLUSIONS—: An optical, pressure-monitoring microcatheter measures lower FFR compared with a pressure wire, but the diagnostic impact appears to be minimal in most cases. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION—: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT02577484. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5753822 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-57538222018-01-31 ACIST-FFR Study (Assessment of Catheter-Based Interrogation and Standard Techniques for Fractional Flow Reserve Measurement) Fearon, William F. Chambers, Jeffrey W. Seto, Arnold H. Sarembock, Ian J. Raveendran, Ganesh Sakarovitch, Charlotte Yang, Lingyao Desai, Manisha Jeremias, Allen Price, Matthew J. Circ Cardiovasc Interv Original Articles BACKGROUND—: Measurement of fractional flow reserve (FFR) to guide coronary revascularization lags despite robust supportive data, partly because of the handling characteristics of traditional coronary pressure wires. An optical pressure-monitoring microcatheter, which can be advanced over a traditional coronary guidewire, facilitates FFR assessment but may underestimate pressure wire–derived FFR. METHODS AND RESULTS—: In this prospective, multicenter trial, 169 patients underwent FFR assessment with a pressure wire alone and with a pressure microcatheter over the pressure wire. An independent core laboratory performed quantitative coronary angiography and evaluated all pressure tracings. The primary end point was the bias or difference between the microcatheter FFR and the pressure wire FFR, as assessed by Bland–Altman analysis. The mean difference between the microcatheter and the pressure wire–derived FFR values was −0.022 (95% confidence interval, −0.029 to −0.015). On multivariable analysis, reference vessel diameter (P=0.027) and lesion length (P=0.044) were independent predictors of bias between the 2 FFR measurements. When the microcatheter FFR was added to this model, it was the only independent predictor of bias (P<0.001). The mean FFR value from the microcatheter was significantly lower than from the pressure wire (0.81 versus 0.83; P<0.001). In 3% of cases (95% confidence interval, 1.3%–6.7%), there was clinically meaningful diagnostic discordance, with the FFR from the pressure wire >0.80 and that from the microcatheter <0.75. These findings were similar when including all 210 patients with site-reported paired FFR data. CONCLUSIONS—: An optical, pressure-monitoring microcatheter measures lower FFR compared with a pressure wire, but the diagnostic impact appears to be minimal in most cases. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION—: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT02577484. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2017-12 2017-12-13 /pmc/articles/PMC5753822/ /pubmed/29246917 http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.117.005905 Text en Copyright © 2017 The Authors. Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions is published on behalf of the American Heart Association, Inc., by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided that the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Articles Fearon, William F. Chambers, Jeffrey W. Seto, Arnold H. Sarembock, Ian J. Raveendran, Ganesh Sakarovitch, Charlotte Yang, Lingyao Desai, Manisha Jeremias, Allen Price, Matthew J. ACIST-FFR Study (Assessment of Catheter-Based Interrogation and Standard Techniques for Fractional Flow Reserve Measurement) |
title | ACIST-FFR Study (Assessment of Catheter-Based Interrogation and Standard Techniques for Fractional Flow Reserve Measurement) |
title_full | ACIST-FFR Study (Assessment of Catheter-Based Interrogation and Standard Techniques for Fractional Flow Reserve Measurement) |
title_fullStr | ACIST-FFR Study (Assessment of Catheter-Based Interrogation and Standard Techniques for Fractional Flow Reserve Measurement) |
title_full_unstemmed | ACIST-FFR Study (Assessment of Catheter-Based Interrogation and Standard Techniques for Fractional Flow Reserve Measurement) |
title_short | ACIST-FFR Study (Assessment of Catheter-Based Interrogation and Standard Techniques for Fractional Flow Reserve Measurement) |
title_sort | acist-ffr study (assessment of catheter-based interrogation and standard techniques for fractional flow reserve measurement) |
topic | Original Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5753822/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29246917 http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.117.005905 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT fearonwilliamf acistffrstudyassessmentofcatheterbasedinterrogationandstandardtechniquesforfractionalflowreservemeasurement AT chambersjeffreyw acistffrstudyassessmentofcatheterbasedinterrogationandstandardtechniquesforfractionalflowreservemeasurement AT setoarnoldh acistffrstudyassessmentofcatheterbasedinterrogationandstandardtechniquesforfractionalflowreservemeasurement AT sarembockianj acistffrstudyassessmentofcatheterbasedinterrogationandstandardtechniquesforfractionalflowreservemeasurement AT raveendranganesh acistffrstudyassessmentofcatheterbasedinterrogationandstandardtechniquesforfractionalflowreservemeasurement AT sakarovitchcharlotte acistffrstudyassessmentofcatheterbasedinterrogationandstandardtechniquesforfractionalflowreservemeasurement AT yanglingyao acistffrstudyassessmentofcatheterbasedinterrogationandstandardtechniquesforfractionalflowreservemeasurement AT desaimanisha acistffrstudyassessmentofcatheterbasedinterrogationandstandardtechniquesforfractionalflowreservemeasurement AT jeremiasallen acistffrstudyassessmentofcatheterbasedinterrogationandstandardtechniquesforfractionalflowreservemeasurement AT pricematthewj acistffrstudyassessmentofcatheterbasedinterrogationandstandardtechniquesforfractionalflowreservemeasurement |