Rationale and design of the Concordance study between FFR and iFR for the assessment of lesions in the left main coronary artery. The ILITRO-EPIC-07 Trial

Introduction and objectives: Patients with left main coronary artery (LMCA) stenosis have been excluded from the trials that support the non-inferiority of the instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) compared to the fractional flow reserve (FFR) in the decision-making process of coronary revascularization. This study proposes to prospectively assess the concordance between the two indices in LMCA lesions and to validate the iFR cut-off value of 0.89 for clinical use. Methods: National, prospective, and observational multicenter registry of 300 consecutive patients with intermediate lesions in the LMCA (angiographic stenosis, 25% to 60%. A pressure gudiewire study and determination of the RFF and the iFR will be performed: in the event of a negative concordant result (FFR > 0.80/iFR > 0.89), no treatment will be performed; in case of a positive concordant result (FFR 0.80/iFR 0.89), an intravascular echocardiography will be performed and revascularization will be delayed if the minimum lumen area is > 6 mm(2). The primary clinical endpoint will be a composite of cardiovascular death, LMCA lesion-related non-fatal infarction or need for revascularization of the LMCA lesion at 12 months. Conclusions: Confirm that an iFR-guided decision-making process in patients with intermediate LMCA stenosis is clinically safe and would have a significant clinical impact. Also, justify its systematic use when prescribing treatment in these potentially high-risk patients

Changes in the treatment strategy following intracoronary pressure wire in a contemporaneous real-life cohort of patients with intermediate coronary stenosis. Results from a nationwide registry

Background Intracoronary pressure wire is useful to guide revascularization in patients with coronary artery disease. Aims To evaluate changes in diagnosis (coronary artery disease extent), treatment strategy and clinical results after intracoronary pressure wire study in real-life patients with intermediate coronary artery stenosis. Methods Observational, prospective and multicenter registry of patients in whom pressure wire was performed. The extent of coronary artery disease and the treatment strategy based on clinical and angiographic criteria were recorded before and after intracoronary pressure wire guidance. 12-month incidence of MACE (cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction or new revascularization of the target lesion) was assessed. Results 1414 patients with 1781 lesions were included. Complications related to the procedure were reported in 42 patients (3.0 %). The extent of coronary artery disease changed in 771 patients (54.5 %). There was a change in treatment strategy in 779 patients (55.1 %) (18.0 % if medical treatment; 68.8 % if PCI; 58.9 % if surgery (p < 0.001 for PCI vs medical treatment; p = 0.041 for PCI vs CABG; p < 0.001 for medical treatment vs CABG)). In patients with PCI as the initial strategy, the change in strategy was associated with a lower rate of MACE (4.6 % vs 8.2 %, p = 0.034). Conclusions The use of intracoronary pressure wire was safe and led to the reclassification of the extent of coronary disease and change in the treatment strategy in more than half of the cases, especially in patients with PCI as initial treatment

Justificación y diseño del estudio Concordancia entre RFF e iFR en lesiones del tronco común.: Estudio iLITRO-EPIC-07

Introduction and objectives: Patients with left main coronary artery (LMCA) stenosis have been excluded from the trials that support the non-inferiority of the instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) compared to the fractional flow reserve (FFR) in the decision-making process of coronary revascularization. This study proposes to prospectively assess the concordance between the two indices in LMCA lesions and to validate the iFR cut-off value of 0.89 for clinical use. Methods: National, prospective, and observational multicenter registry of 300 consecutive patients with intermediate lesions in the LMCA (angiographic stenosis, 25% to 60%. A pressure gudiewire study and determination of the RFF and the iFR will be performed: in the event of a negative concordant result (FFR > 0.80/iFR > 0.89), no treatment will be performed; in case of a positive concordant result (FFR ≤ 0.80/iFR ≤ 0.89), revascularization will be performed; In the event of a discordant result (FFR> 0.80/iFR ≤ 0.89 or FFR ≤ 0.80/iFR> 0.89), an intravascular echocardiography will be performed and revascularization will be delayed if the minimum lumen area is > 6 mm2. The primary clinical endpoint will be a composite of cardiovascular death, LMCA lesion-related non-fatal infarction or need for revascularization of the LMCA lesion at 12 months. Conclusions: Confirm that an iFR-guided decision-making process in patients with intermediate LMCA stenosis is clinically safe and would have a significant clinical impact. Also, justify its systematic use when prescribing treatment in these potentially high-risk patients. Registered at ClinicalTrials.gov ( Identifier: NCT03767621).Introducción y objetivos: Los pacientes con estenosis en el tronco coronario izquierdo (TCI) han sido excluidos de los ensayos que apoyan la no inferioridad del cociente de presiones en el índice diastólico instantáneo sin ondas (iFR) respecto a la reserva fraccional de flujo (RFF) en la toma de decisiones sobre revascularización coronaria. El presente estudio propone valorar de manera prospectiva la concordancia entre los dos índices en lesiones del TCI y validar el valor de corte del iFR de 0,89 para su uso clínico. Métodos: Registro multicéntrico nacional, prospectivo, observacional, con la inclusión de 300 pacientes consecutivos con lesiones intermedias (estenosis angiográfica 25-60%) en el TCI. Se realizará un estudio con guía de presión y determinación de RFF e iFR. En caso de resultado concordante negativo (RFF > 0,80 / iFR > 0,89), no se realizará tratamiento; en caso de resultado concordante positivo (RFF ≤ 0,80 / iFR ≤ 0,89), se realizará revascularización; en caso de resultado discordante (RFF > 0,80 / iFR ≤ 0,89 o RFF ≤ 0,80 / iFR > 0,89), se realizará estudio con ecocardiografía intravascular y se considerará diferir la revascularización si el área luminal mínima es > 6 mm2. El criterio de valoración clínico primario será la incidencia del combinado de muerte cardiovascular, infarto no mortal relacionado con la lesión del TCI o necesidad de revascularización de la lesión del TCI a los 12 meses. Conclusiones: La demostración de la seguridad clínica en la toma de decisiones del iFR en pacientes con lesiones intermedias en el TCI tendría un impacto clínico importante y justificaría su uso sistemático para la decisión del tratamiento en estos pacientes de potencial alto riesgo. Registrado en ClinicalTrials.gov (identificador: NCT03767621)