Daisuke Nakamura1, William Wijns2, Matthew J Price3, Michael R Jones4, Emanuele Barbato5, Takashi Akasaka6, Stephen W-L Lee7, Sandeep M Patel1, Setsu Nishino1, Wei Wang1, Ajay Gopinath1, Guilherme F Attizzani1, David Holmes8, Hiram G Bezerra9. 1. Harrington Heart and Vascular Institute, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio. 2. Cardiovascular Research Center, OLV Hospital, Aalst, Belgium; The Lambe Institute for Translational Medicine and CURAM, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland. 3. Scripps Clinic, La Jolla, California. 4. Baptist Health Lexington, Lexington, Kentucky. 5. Cardiovascular Research Center, OLV Hospital, Aalst, Belgium. 6. Wakayama Medical University, Wakayama, Japan. 7. University of Hong Kong, Queen Mary Hospital, Hospital Authority, Pok Fu Lam, Hong Kong. 8. Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota. 9. Harrington Heart and Vascular Institute, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio. Electronic address: hiram.bezerra@uhhospitals.org.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study sought to compare conventional methodology (CM) with a newly described optical coherence tomography (OCT)-derived volumetric stent expansion analysis in terms of fractional flow reserve (FFR)-derived physiology and device-oriented composite endpoints (DoCE). BACKGROUND: The analysis of coronary stent expansion with intracoronary imaging has used CM that relies on the analysis of selected single cross-sections for several decades. The introduction of OCT with its ability to perform semiautomated volumetric analysis opens opportunities to redefine optimal stent expansion. METHODS: A total of 291 lesions treated with post-stent OCT and FFR were enrolled. The expansion index was calculated by using a novel volumetric algorithm and was defined as: ([actual lumen area / ideal lumen area] × 100) for each frame of the stented segment. The minimum expansion index (MEI) was defined as the minimum value of expansion index along the entire stented segment. MEI and conventional lumen expansion metrics were compared for the ability to predict post-stent low FFR (<0.90) and DoCE at 1 year. RESULTS: There was a stronger correlation between MEI and final FFR, compared with CM and final FFR (r = 0.690; p < 0.001) versus (r = 0.165; p = 0.044). MEI was significantly lower in patients with DoCE than those without DoCE (72.18 ± 8.23% vs. 81.48 ± 11.03%; p < 0.001), although stent expansion by CM was similar between patients with and without DoCE (85.05 ± 22.19% and 83.73 ± 17.52%; p = 0.858), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: OCT analysis of stent expansion with a newly described volumetric method, but not with CM, yielded data that were predictive of both an acute improvement in FFR-derived physiology and DoCE.
OBJECTIVES: This study sought to compare conventional methodology (CM) with a newly described optical coherence tomography (OCT)-derived volumetric stent expansion analysis in terms of fractional flow reserve (FFR)-derived physiology and device-oriented composite endpoints (DoCE). BACKGROUND: The analysis of coronary stent expansion with intracoronary imaging has used CM that relies on the analysis of selected single cross-sections for several decades. The introduction of OCT with its ability to perform semiautomated volumetric analysis opens opportunities to redefine optimal stent expansion. METHODS: A total of 291 lesions treated with post-stent OCT and FFR were enrolled. The expansion index was calculated by using a novel volumetric algorithm and was defined as: ([actual lumen area / ideal lumen area] × 100) for each frame of the stented segment. The minimum expansion index (MEI) was defined as the minimum value of expansion index along the entire stented segment. MEI and conventional lumen expansion metrics were compared for the ability to predict post-stent low FFR (<0.90) and DoCE at 1 year. RESULTS: There was a stronger correlation between MEI and final FFR, compared with CM and final FFR (r = 0.690; p < 0.001) versus (r = 0.165; p = 0.044). MEI was significantly lower in patients with DoCE than those without DoCE (72.18 ± 8.23% vs. 81.48 ± 11.03%; p < 0.001), although stent expansion by CM was similar between patients with and without DoCE (85.05 ± 22.19% and 83.73 ± 17.52%; p = 0.858), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: OCT analysis of stent expansion with a newly described volumetric method, but not with CM, yielded data that were predictive of both an acute improvement in FFR-derived physiology and DoCE.