Literature DB >> 31648761

Blinded Physiological Assessment of Residual Ischemia After Successful Angiographic Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: The DEFINE PCI Study.

Allen Jeremias1, Justin E Davies2, Akiko Maehara3, Mitsuaki Matsumura4, Joel Schneider5, Kare Tang6, Suneel Talwar7, Koen Marques8, Nicolas W Shammas9, Luis Gruberg10, Arnold Seto11, Habib Samady12, Andrew Sharp13, Ziad A Ali3, Gary Mintz4, Manesh Patel14, Gregg W Stone3.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to evaluate the incidence and causes of an abnormal instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) after angiographically successful percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).
BACKGROUND: Impaired coronary physiology as assessed by fractional flow reserve is present in some patients after PCI and is prognostically relevant.
METHODS: DEFINE PCI (Physiologic Assessment of Coronary Stenosis Following PCI) was a multicenter, prospective, observational study in which a blinded iFR pull back was performed after angiographically successful PCI in 562 vessels in 500 patients. Inclusion criteria were angina with either multivessel or multilesion coronary artery disease with an abnormal baseline iFR. The primary endpoint of the study was the rate of residual ischemia after operator-assessed angiographically successful PCI, defined as an iFR <0.90. The causes of impaired iFR were categorized as stent related, untreated proximal or distal focal stenosis, or diffuse atherosclerosis.
RESULTS: An average of 1.1 vessels per patient had abnormal baseline iFRs, with a mean value of 0.69 ± 0.22, which improved to 0.93 ± 0.07 post-PCI. Residual ischemia after angiographically successful PCI was present in 112 patients (24.0%), with a mean iFR in that population of 0.84 ± 0.06 (range 0.60 to 0.89). Among patients with impaired post-PCI iFRs, 81.6% had untreated focal stenoses that were angiographically inapparent, and 18.4% had diffuse disease. Among the focal lesions, 38.4% were located within the stent segment, while 31.5% were proximal and 30.1% were distal to the stent. Post-PCI vessel angiographic diameter stenosis was not a predictor of impaired post-procedural iFR.
CONCLUSIONS: Blinded post-PCI physiological assessment detected residual ischemia in nearly 1 in 4 patients after coronary stenting despite an operator-determined angiographically successful result. Most cases of residual ischemia were due to inapparent focal lesions potentially amenable to treatment with additional PCI. (Physiologic Assessment of Coronary Stenosis Following PCI [DEFINE PCI]; NCT03084367).
Copyright © 2019 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  coronary physiology; ischemia; percutaneous coronary intervention

Year:  2019        PMID: 31648761     DOI: 10.1016/j.jcin.2019.05.054

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JACC Cardiovasc Interv        ISSN: 1936-8798            Impact factor:   11.195


  31 in total

Review 1.  Complete versus incomplete coronary revascularization: definitions, assessment and outcomes.

Authors:  Prakriti Gaba; Bernard J Gersh; Ziad A Ali; Jeffrey W Moses; Gregg W Stone
Journal:  Nat Rev Cardiol       Date:  2020-10-16       Impact factor: 32.419

2.  Morphology and physiology together: Is optical coherence tomography the one-stop-shop of invasive cardiology?

Authors:  Carlo Di Mario; Pierluigi Demola
Journal:  Cardiol J       Date:  2020       Impact factor: 2.737

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.  The Clinical Significance of Physiological Assessment of Residual Ischemia After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.

Authors:  Chandra P Ojha; Ahmed Ibrahim; Timir K Paul; Venkatachalam Mulukutla; Harsha S Nagarajarao
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2020-02-08       Impact factor: 2.931

5.  Prognostic value of post-percutaneous coronary intervention diastolic pressure ratio.

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

6.  Understanding Fractional Flow Reserve/Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio Discordance Can Provide Coronary Clarity.

Authors:  David M Tehrani; Arnold H Seto
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2022-05-02       Impact factor: 6.106

Review 7.  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

8.  A randomized controlled trial of a physiology-guided percutaneous coronary intervention optimization strategy: Rationale and design of the TARGET FFR study.

Authors:  Damien Collison; John D McClure; Colin Berry; Keith G Oldroyd
Journal:  Clin Cardiol       Date:  2020-02-10       Impact factor: 2.882

9.  Comparison of the incidence of periprocedural myocardial infarction between percutaneous coronary intervention with versus without rotational atherectomy using propensity score-matching.

Authors:  Yusuke Mizuno; Kenichi Sakakura; Hiroyuki Jinnouchi; Yousuke Taniguchi; Takunori Tsukui; Kei Yamamoto; Masaru Seguchi; Hiroshi Wada; Hideo Fujita
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-05-27       Impact factor: 4.379

10.  Invasive Physiological Assessment: From Binary to Continuous.

Authors:  Daniel Chamié; Alexandre Abizaid
Journal:  Arq Bras Cardiol       Date:  2020-02       Impact factor: 2.000

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.