Literature DB >> 26717890

Fractional Flow Reserve Evaluation and Chronic Kidney Disease: Analysis From a Multicenter Italian Registry (the FREAK Study).

Matteo Tebaldi1, Simone Biscaglia2, Massimo Fineschi3, Antonio Manari4, Mila Menozzi5, Gioel Gabrio Secco6, Emilio Di Lorenzo7, Fabrizio D'Ascenzo8, Fabio Fabbian9, Carlo Tumscitz2, Roberto Ferrari2,10, Gianluca Campo2,11.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To establish if the presence of chronic kidney disease (CKD) influences fractional flow reserve (FFR) value in patients with intermediate coronary stenosis.
BACKGROUND: FFR-guided coronary revascularization reduces cardiac adverse events in patients with coronary artery disease. CKD impairs microcirculation and increases cardiovascular risk. Whether CKD presence may limit FFR accuracy is unknown.
METHODS: We used data from a multicenter prospective registry enrolling 1.004 patients undergoing FFR evaluation for intermediate stenosis. We assessed the relationship between clinical and angiographic variables and FFR measurement. CKD was defined as CrCl value ≤45 ml/min. FFR value was considered potentially flow-limiting, and therefore positive, if ≤0.80. The index of microcirculatory resistance (IMR) was calculated in 20 patients stratified according CrCl value (single-center substudy).
RESULTS: FFR measurement was positive in 395 (39%) patients. Overall, 131 (13%) patients had CKD. Patients with CrCl ≤45 ml/min showed significantly higher FFR values as compared to the others (0.84 ± 0.07 vs. 0.81 ± 0.08, p < 0.001). Positive FFR occurrence was lower in patients with CrCl ≤45 ml/min (27% vs. 41%, p < 0.01). After multivariable analysis, diabetes (HR 1.07, 95%CI 1.008-1.13, p = 0.03), left anterior descending (HR 1.35, 95%CI 1.27-1.43, p < 0.001) and CrCl ≤45 ml/min (HR 0.92, 95%CI 0.87-0.97, p = 0.005) emerged as independent predictors of FFR measurement. Accordingly, IMR values were higher in patients with CrCl ≤45 ml/min (32 U [28245] vs. 16 U [11220], p < 0.01).
CONCLUSIONS: FFR and IMR measurements differ between CKD patients and those with normal renal function. Flow-limiting FFR is less frequent in patients with CrCl ≤45 ml/min.
© 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  coronary artery disease; microvascular function; renal failure

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26717890     DOI: 10.1002/ccd.26364

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Catheter Cardiovasc Interv        ISSN: 1522-1946            Impact factor:   2.692


  18 in total

1.  Coronary artery height differences and their effect on fractional flow reserve.

Authors:  Firas Al-Janabi; Grigoris Karamasis; Chritopher M Cook; Alamgir M Kabir; Rohan O Jagathesan; Nicholas M Robinson; Jeremy W Sayer; Rajesh K Aggarwal; Gerald J Clesham; Paul R Kelly; Reto A Gamma; Kare H Tang; Thomas R Keeble; John R Davies
Journal:  Cardiol J       Date:  2019-03-26       Impact factor: 2.737

2.  Fractional flow reserve as an indicator of coronary circulation with special reference to kidney function.

Authors:  Tomoyuki Kawada
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2017-01-26       Impact factor: 5.952

3.  [Cardiovascular pharmacotherapy and coronary revascularization in end-stage renal failure].

Authors:  L Lauder; S Ewen; I E Emrich; M Böhm; F Mahfoud
Journal:  Herz       Date:  2019-11       Impact factor: 1.443

4.  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.

Authors:  Tomas Kovarnik; Matsuo Hitoshi; Ales Kral; Stepan Jerabek; David Zemanek; Yoshiaki Kawase; Hiroyuki Omori; Toru Tanigaki; Jan Pudil; Alexandra Vodzinska; Marian Branny; Roman Stipal; Petr Kala; Jan Mrozek; Martin Porzer; Tomas Grezl; Kamil Novobilsky; Oscar Mendiz; Karel Kopriva; Martin Mates; Martin Chval; Zhi Chen; Pavel Martasek; Ales Linhart
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2022-05-03       Impact factor: 6.106

Review 5.  Impact of impaired fractional flow reserve after coronary interventions on outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Mathias Wolfrum; Gregor Fahrni; Giovanni Luigi de Maria; Guido Knapp; Nick Curzen; Rajesh K Kharbanda; Georg M Fröhlich; Adrian P Banning
Journal:  BMC Cardiovasc Disord       Date:  2016-09-08       Impact factor: 2.298

6.  Type 2 diabetes compromises the value of non-invasively measured augmentation index in predicting the severity of coronary artery disease: a hospital-based observational study.

Authors:  Sijing Wu; Yujie Zhou; Yueping Li; Yuyang Liu; Dongmei Shi; Xiaoli Liu; Wei Liu; Yi Yu; Shuo Jia
Journal:  BMC Cardiovasc Disord       Date:  2016-11-10       Impact factor: 2.298

Review 7.  Comparing the adverse clinical outcomes associated with fraction flow reserve-guided versus angiography-guided percutaneous coronary intervention: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Pravesh Kumar Bundhun; Chandra Mouli Yanamala; Feng Huang
Journal:  BMC Cardiovasc Disord       Date:  2016-12-03       Impact factor: 2.298

8.  Correlations of serum cystatin C and glomerular filtration rate with vascular lesions and severity in acute coronary syndrome.

Authors:  Jinjin Zhang; Xianhao Wu; Peizhen Gao; Pingping Yan
Journal:  BMC Cardiovasc Disord       Date:  2017-01-31       Impact factor: 2.298

9.  Assessment of increasing intravenous adenosine dose in fractional flow reserve.

Authors:  David Sparv; Matthias Götberg; Jan Harnek; Tobias Persson; Bjarne Madsen Hardig; David Erlinge
Journal:  BMC Cardiovasc Disord       Date:  2017-02-14       Impact factor: 2.298

10.  Chronic kidney disease and diabetes associated with long-term outcomes in patients receiving percutaneous coronary intervention.

Authors:  Mao-Jen Lin; Jung Lee; Chun-Yu Chen; Chia-Chen Huang; Han-Ping Wu
Journal:  BMC Cardiovasc Disord       Date:  2017-09-11       Impact factor: 2.298

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.