AIMS: Among technologies used to assess FFR, a monorail, sensor-tipped micro pressure catheter (PC) may be advantageous for delivery and re-assessment. We sought to determine whether the larger cross-sectional area of the PC influences FFR measurements compared to the pressure wire. METHODS AND RESULTS: PERFORM was a single-centre, prospective study designed to determine the precision and accuracy of the PC compared with the pressure wire (PW) for measurement of FFR. Eligible patients had native coronary artery target lesions with visually estimated diameter stenosis of 40-90%. The independently adjudicated primary endpoint was the difference in hyperaemic PW-determined minimal FFR with and without the PC distal to the stenosis. Seventy-four patients (95 lesions) were prospectively analysed between December 2015 and December 2016. Median hyperaemic FFR was 0.84 (IQR 0.78, 0.89) with the PW and 0.79 (IQR 0.73, 0.85) with the PC distal to the stenosis (p<0.001). Such differences led to clinical discordance, whereby the PC decreased the hyperaemic PW-determined FFR from >0.80 to ≤0.80 in 17 of 95 measurements (19%). Median resting Pd/Pa was lower following introduction of the PC compared with the PW alone (0.93 [IQR 0.90, 0.97] versus 0.90 [IQR 0.86, 0.95], p<0.001). Median pressure drift was not different between the PW and the PC (0.01 [IQR -0.01, 0.05] versus 0.01 [IQR 0.00, 0.02], p=0.38). CONCLUSIONS: Introduction of the PC reduced both hyperaemic FFR and resting Pd/Pa compared with the PW alone, leading to re-classifying physiological significance to below the clinical threshold in one out of five assessments.
AIMS: Among technologies used to assess FFR, a monorail, sensor-tipped micro pressure catheter (PC) may be advantageous for delivery and re-assessment. We sought to determine whether the larger cross-sectional area of the PC influences FFR measurements compared to the pressure wire. METHODS AND RESULTS: PERFORM was a single-centre, prospective study designed to determine the precision and accuracy of the PC compared with the pressure wire (PW) for measurement of FFR. Eligible patients had native coronary artery target lesions with visually estimated diameter stenosis of 40-90%. The independently adjudicated primary endpoint was the difference in hyperaemic PW-determined minimal FFR with and without the PC distal to the stenosis. Seventy-four patients (95 lesions) were prospectively analysed between December 2015 and December 2016. Median hyperaemic FFR was 0.84 (IQR 0.78, 0.89) with the PW and 0.79 (IQR 0.73, 0.85) with the PC distal to the stenosis (p<0.001). Such differences led to clinical discordance, whereby the PC decreased the hyperaemic PW-determined FFR from >0.80 to ≤0.80 in 17 of 95 measurements (19%). Median resting Pd/Pa was lower following introduction of the PC compared with the PW alone (0.93 [IQR 0.90, 0.97] versus 0.90 [IQR 0.86, 0.95], p<0.001). Median pressure drift was not different between the PW and the PC (0.01 [IQR -0.01, 0.05] versus 0.01 [IQR 0.00, 0.02], p=0.38). CONCLUSIONS: Introduction of the PC reduced both hyperaemic FFR and resting Pd/Pa compared with the PW alone, leading to re-classifying physiological significance to below the clinical threshold in one out of five assessments.
Authors: K Masdjedi; L J C van Zandvoort; T Neleman; I Kardys; J Ligthart; W K Den Dekker; R Diletti; F Zijlstra; N M Van Mieghem; J Daemen Journal: Neth Heart J Date: 2022-04-07 Impact factor: 2.854
Authors: Henry Seligman; Matthew J Shun-Shin; Anushkumar Vasireddy; Christopher Cook; Yousif Y Ahmad; James Howard; Sayan Sen; Rasha Al-Lamee; Sukhjinder Nijjer; Daniel Chamie; Justin Davies; Jamil Mayet; Darrel P Francis; Ricardo Petraco Journal: Open Heart Date: 2019-03-25