Literature DB >> 31329863

Diastolic pressure ratio: new approach and validation vs. the instantaneous wave-free ratio.

Nils P Johnson1, Wenguang Li2, Xi Chen2, Barry Hennigan3,4, Stuart Watkins3,4, Colin Berry3,4, William F Fearon5, Keith G Oldroyd3,4.   

Abstract

AIMS: The instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) and whole-cycle Pd/Pa investigate coronary physiology during non-hyperaemic conditions. To test for unique physiologic properties of the wave-free period when making resting coronary pressure measurements, we compared post hoc a diastolic pressure ratio (dPR) and Pd/Pa against iFR for numerical similarity and test/retest repeatability. METHODS AND
RESULTS: Eight hundred and ninety-three lesions from 833 subjects were included from the VERIFY 2 and CONTRAST studies. Diastolic pressure ratio and a linear transform of Pd/Pa were compared against iFR for diagnostic performance. Mean difference between dPR and iFR [Δ = -0.006 ± 0.011, r2 = 0.993, area under receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) = 0.997] mirrored the difference of two iFR measurements repeated immediately (Δ = <0.001 ± 0.004, r2 = 0.998, AUC = 1.00). Minor variations in the definition of dPR changed its value by <1-2% over a broad range of the cardiac cycle. A linear transform of Pd/Pa showed very good diagnostic performance (Δ = -0.012 ± 0.031, r2 = 0.927, AUC = 0.979). Post hoc iFR values were validated against real-time iFR values and matched almost exactly (average Δ = <0.001 ± 0.004, 99.6% within ±0.01).
CONCLUSIONS: Our dPR offers numerical equivalency to iFR. Despite different technical approaches for identifying the relevant period of diastole, the agreement between dPR and iFR and the insensitivity of dPR to minor variations in its definition further confirm numerical equivalency among resting metrics. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.
© The Author(s) 2019. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Coronary physiology; Instantaneous wave-free ratio

Year:  2019        PMID: 31329863      PMCID: PMC6692701          DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehz230

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Heart J        ISSN: 0195-668X            Impact factor:   29.983


  29 in total

1.  Diastolic fractional flow reserve to assess the functional severity of moderate coronary artery stenoses: comparison with fractional flow reserve and coronary flow velocity reserve.

Authors:  M Abe; H Tomiyama; H Yoshida; N Doba
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2000-11-07       Impact factor: 29.690

2.  Development and validation of a new adenosine-independent index of stenosis severity from coronary wave-intensity analysis: results of the ADVISE (ADenosine Vasodilator Independent Stenosis Evaluation) study.

Authors:  Sayan Sen; Javier Escaned; Iqbal S Malik; Ghada W Mikhail; Rodney A Foale; Rafael Mila; Jason Tarkin; Ricardo Petraco; Christopher Broyd; Richard Jabbour; Amarjit Sethi; Christopher S Baker; Micheal Bellamy; Mahmud Al-Bustami; David Hackett; Masood Khan; David Lefroy; Kim H Parker; Alun D Hughes; Darrel P Francis; Carlo Di Mario; Jamil Mayet; Justin E Davies
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2011-12-07       Impact factor: 24.094

3.  Resting Pd/Pa measured with intracoronary pressure wire strongly predicts fractional flow reserve.

Authors:  Mamas A Mamas; Simon Horner; Elise Welch; Anthony Ashworth; Simon Millington; Doug Fraser; Farzin Fath-Ordoubadi; Ludwig Neyses; Magdi El-Omar
Journal:  J Invasive Cardiol       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 2.022

4.  Clinical validation of the resting pressure parameters in the assessment of functionally significant coronary stenosis; results of an independent, blinded comparison with fractional flow reserve.

Authors:  Jin Joo Park; Ricardo Petraco; Chang-Wook Nam; Joon-Hyung Doh; Justin Davies; Javier Escaned; Bon-Kwon Koo
Journal:  Int J Cardiol       Date:  2013-07-26       Impact factor: 4.164

5.  Wave Separation, Wave Intensity, the Reservoir-Wave Concept, and the Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio: Presumptions and Principles.

Authors:  Nico Westerhof; Patrick Segers; Berend E Westerhof
Journal:  Hypertension       Date:  2015-05-26       Impact factor: 10.190

6.  Prospective Assessment of the Diagnostic Accuracy of Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio to Assess Coronary Stenosis Relevance: Results of ADVISE II International, Multicenter Study (ADenosine Vasodilator Independent Stenosis Evaluation II).

Authors:  Javier Escaned; Mauro Echavarría-Pinto; Hector M Garcia-Garcia; Tim P van de Hoef; Ton de Vries; Prashant Kaul; Ganesh Raveendran; John D Altman; Howard I Kurz; Johannes Brechtken; Mark Tulli; Clemens Von Birgelen; Joel E Schneider; Ahmed A Khashaba; Allen Jeremias; Jim Baucum; Raul Moreno; Martijn Meuwissen; Gregory Mishkel; Robert-Jan van Geuns; Howard Levite; Ramon Lopez-Palop; Marc Mayhew; Patrick W Serruys; Habib Samady; Jan J Piek; Amir Lerman
Journal:  JACC Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2015-05       Impact factor: 11.195

7.  Effects of adenosine on human coronary arterial circulation.

Authors:  R F Wilson; K Wyche; B V Christensen; S Zimmer; D D Laxson
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  1990-11       Impact factor: 29.690

8.  Hybrid iFR-FFR decision-making strategy: implications for enhancing universal adoption of physiology-guided coronary revascularisation.

Authors:  Ricardo Petraco; Jin Joo Park; Sayan Sen; Sukhjinder S Nijjer; Iqbal S Malik; Mauro Echavarría-Pinto; Kaleab N Asrress; Chang-Wook Nam; Enrico Macías; Rodney A Foale; Amarjit Sethi; Ghada W Mikhail; Raffi Kaprielian; Christopher S Baker; David Lefroy; Michael Bellamy; Mahmud Al-Bustami; Masood A Khan; Nieves Gonzalo; Alun D Hughes; Darrel P Francis; Jamil Mayet; Carlo Di Mario; Simon Redwood; Javier Escaned; Bon-Kwon Koo; Justin E Davies
Journal:  EuroIntervention       Date:  2013-02-22       Impact factor: 6.534

9.  Multicenter core laboratory comparison of the instantaneous wave-free ratio and resting Pd/Pa with fractional flow reserve: the RESOLVE study.

Authors:  Allen Jeremias; Akiko Maehara; Philippe Généreux; Kaleab N Asrress; Colin Berry; Bernard De Bruyne; Justin E Davies; Javier Escaned; William F Fearon; K Lance Gould; Nils P Johnson; Ajay J Kirtane; Bon-Kwon Koo; Koen M Marques; Sukhjinder Nijjer; Keith G Oldroyd; Ricardo Petraco; Jan J Piek; Nico H Pijls; Simon Redwood; Maria Siebes; Jos A E Spaan; Marcel van 't Veer; Gary S Mintz; Gregg W Stone
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2013-11-06       Impact factor: 24.094

10.  Coronary pressure and flow relationships in humans: phasic analysis of normal and pathological vessels and the implications for stenosis assessment: a report from the Iberian-Dutch-English (IDEAL) collaborators.

Authors:  Sukhjinder S Nijjer; Guus A de Waard; Sayan Sen; Tim P van de Hoef; Ricardo Petraco; Mauro Echavarría-Pinto; Martijn A van Lavieren; Martijn Meuwissen; Ibrahim Danad; Paul Knaapen; Javier Escaned; Jan J Piek; Justin E Davies; Niels van Royen
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2015-11-26       Impact factor: 29.983

View more
  11 in total

Review 1.  Non-hyperaemic coronary pressure measurements to guide coronary interventions.

Authors:  Tim P van de Hoef; Joo Myung Lee; Mauro Echavarria-Pinto; Bon-Kwon Koo; Hitoshi Matsuo; Manesh R Patel; Justin E Davies; Javier Escaned; Jan J Piek
Journal:  Nat Rev Cardiol       Date:  2020-05-14       Impact factor: 32.419

Review 2.  [Coronary physiology in the catheter laboratory].

Authors:  Stefan Baumann; Waldemar Bojara; Heiner Post; Tanja Rudolph; Tim Schäufele; Peter Ong; Ralf Lehmann; Constantin von Zur Mühlen
Journal:  Herz       Date:  2020-01-14       Impact factor: 1.443

Review 3.  Physiological Assessment of Coronary Lesions in 2020.

Authors:  Mohsin Chowdhury; Eric A Osborn
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2020-01-15

Review 4.  Physiologic Lesion Assessment to Optimize Multivessel Disease.

Authors:  Murtaza Bharmal; Morton J Kern; Gautam Kumar; Arnold H Seto
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2022-03-02       Impact factor: 3.955

5.  Phasic pressure measurements for coronary and valvular interventions using fluid-filled catheters: Errors, automated correction, and clinical implications.

Authors:  Daniel T Johnson; Stephane Fournier; Richard L Kirkeeide; Bernard De Bruyne; K Lance Gould; Nils P Johnson
Journal:  Catheter Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2020-02-20       Impact factor: 2.692

Review 6.  Fractional Flow Reserve: Patient Selection and Perspectives.

Authors:  Joyce Peper; Leonie M Becker; Jan-Peter van Kuijk; Tim Leiner; Martin J Swaans
Journal:  Vasc Health Risk Manag       Date:  2021-12-14

7.  Coronary Flow Variations Following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Affect Diastolic Nonhyperemic Pressure Ratios More Than the Whole Cycle Ratios.

Authors:  Muhammad Aetesam-Ur-Rahman; Tian X Zhao; Kitty Paques; Joana Oliveira; Bharat Khialani; Stephen Kyranis; Denise M Braganza; Sarah C Clarke; Martin R Bennett; Nick E J West; Stephen P Hoole
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2022-04-26       Impact factor: 6.106

8.  Fractional Flow Reserve and Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio Predict Pathological Wall Shear Stress in Coronary Arteries: Implications for Understanding the Pathophysiological Impact of Functionally Significant Coronary Stenoses.

Authors:  Christopher C Y Wong; Ashkan Javadzadegan; Cuneyt Ada; Jerrett K Lau; Ravinay Bhindi; William F Fearon; Leonard Kritharides; Martin K C Ng; Andy S C Yong
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2022-01-19       Impact factor: 6.106

9.  Coronary Angiography-Derived Diastolic Pressure Ratio.

Authors:  Yanjun Gong; Yundi Feng; Tieci Yi; Fan Yang; Yuxi Li; Long Zhang; Bo Zheng; Tao Hong; Zhaoping Liu; Yunlong Huo; Jianping Li; Yong Huo
Journal:  Front Bioeng Biotechnol       Date:  2020-10-21

Review 10.  Non-hyperaemic pressure ratios to guide percutaneous coronary intervention.

Authors:  Michael Michail; Udit Thakur; Ojas Mehta; John M Ramzy; Andrea Comella; Abdul Rahman Ihdayhid; James D Cameron; Stephen J Nicholls; Stephen P Hoole; Adam J Brown
Journal:  Open Heart       Date:  2020-10
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.