Cargando…

Fractional Flow Reserve Versus Instantaneous Wave‐Free Ratio in Assessment of Lesion Hemodynamic Significance and Explanation of their Discrepancies. International, Multicenter and Prospective Trial: The FiGARO Study

BACKGROUND: The FiGARO (FFR versus iFR in Assessment of Hemodynamic Lesion Significance, and an Explanation of Their Discrepancies) trial is a prospective registry searching for predictors of fractional flow reserve/instantaneous wave‐free ratio (FFR/iFR) discrepancy. METHODS AND RESULTS: FFR/iFR we...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kovarnik, Tomas, Hitoshi, Matsuo, Kral, Ales, Jerabek, Stepan, Zemanek, David, Kawase, Yoshiaki, Omori, Hiroyuki, Tanigaki, Toru, Pudil, Jan, Vodzinska, Alexandra, Branny, Marian, Stipal, Roman, Kala, Petr, Mrozek, Jan, Porzer, Martin, Grezl, Tomas, Novobilsky, Kamil, Mendiz, Oscar, Kopriva, Karel, Mates, Martin, Chval, Martin, Chen, Zhi, Martasek, Pavel, Linhart, Ales
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9238629/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35502771
http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.121.021490
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: The FiGARO (FFR versus iFR in Assessment of Hemodynamic Lesion Significance, and an Explanation of Their Discrepancies) trial is a prospective registry searching for predictors of fractional flow reserve/instantaneous wave‐free ratio (FFR/iFR) discrepancy. METHODS AND RESULTS: FFR/iFR were analyzed using a Verrata wire, and coronary flow reserve was analyzed using a Combomap machine (both Philips‐Volcano). The risk polymorphisms for endothelial nitric oxide synthase and for heme oxygenase‐1 were analyzed. In total, 1884 FFR/iFR measurements from 1564 patients were included. The FFR/iFR discrepancy occurred in 393 measurements (20.9%): FFRp (positive)/iFRn (negative) type (264 lesions, 14.0%) and FFRn/iFRp (129 lesions, 6.8%) type. Coronary flow reserve was measured in 343 lesions, correlating better with iFR (R=0.56, P<0.0001) than FFR (R=0.36, P<0.0001). The coronary flow reserve value in FFRp/iFRn lesions (2.24±0.7) was significantly higher compared with both FFRp/iFRp (1.39±0.36), and FFRn/iFRn lesions (1.8±0.64, P<0.0001). Multivariable logistic regression analysis confirmed (1) sex, age, and lesion location in the right coronary artery as predictors for FFRp/iFRn discrepancy; and (2) hemoglobin level, smoking, and renal insufficiency as predictors for FFRn/iFRp discrepancy. The FFRn/iFRp type of discrepancy was significantly more frequent in patients with both risk types of polymorphisms (endothelial nitric oxide synthase(r)+heme oxygenase‐1(r)): 8 patients (24.2%) compared with FFRp/iFRn type of discrepancy: 2 patients (5.9%), P=0.03. CONCLUSIONS: Predictors for FFRp/iFRn discrepancy were sex, age, and location in the right coronary artery. Predictors for FFRn/iFRp were hemoglobin level, smoking, and renal insufficiency. The risk type of polymorphism in endothelial nitric oxide synthase and heme oxygenase‐1 genes was more frequently found in patients with FFRn/iFRp type of discrepancy. REGISTRATION: URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03033810.