Consensus document for invasive coronary physiologic assessment in Asia-Pacific countries

Background: Currently, invasive physiologic assessment such as fractional flow reserve is widely used worldwide with different adoption rates around the globe. Patient characteristics and physician preferences often differ in the Asia-Pacific (APAC) region with respect to treatment strategy, techniques, lesion complexity, access to coronary physiology and imaging devices, as well as patient management. Thus, there is a need to construct a consensus document on recommendations for use of physiology-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in APAC populations. This document serves as an overview of recommendations describing the best practices for APAC populations to achieve more consistent and optimal clinical outcomes.  Methods and Results: A comprehensive multiple-choice questionnaire was provided to 20 interven- tional cardiologists from 10 countries in the APAC region. Clinical evidence, tips and techniques, and clinical situations for the use of physiology-guided PCI in APAC were reviewed and used to propose key recommendations. There are suggestions to continue to develop evidence for lesion and patient types that will benefit from physiology, develop directions for future research in health economics and local data, develop appropriate use criteria in different countries, and emphasize the importance of education of all stakeholders. A consensus recommendation to enhance the penetration of invasive physiology-based therapy was to adopt the 5E approach: Evidence, Education, Expand hardware, Economics and Expert consensus.  Conclusions: This consensus document and recommendations support interventional fellows and cardiologists, hospital administrators, patients, and medical device companies to build confidence and encourage wider implementation of invasive coronary physiology-guided therapy in the APAC region.

Large expert-curated database for benchmarking document similarity detection in biomedical literature search

Document recommendation systems for locating relevant literature have mostly relied on methods developed a decade ago. This is largely due to the lack of a large offline gold-standard benchmark of relevant documents that cover a variety of research fields such that newly developed literature search techniques can be compared, improved and translated into practice. To overcome this bottleneck, we have established the RElevant LIterature SearcH consortium consisting of more than 1500 scientists from 84 countries, who have collectively annotated the relevance of over 180 000 PubMed-listed articles with regard to their respective seed (input) article/s. The majority of annotations were contributed by highly experienced, original authors of the seed articles. The collected data cover 76% of all unique PubMed Medical Subject Headings descriptors. No systematic biases were observed across different experience levels, research fields or time spent on annotations. More importantly, annotations of the same document pairs contributed by different scientists were highly concordant. We further show that the three representative baseline methods used to generate recommended articles for evaluation (Okapi Best Matching 25, Term Frequency-Inverse Document Frequency and PubMed Related Articles) had similar overall performances. Additionally, we found that these methods each tend to produce distinct collections of recommended articles, suggesting that a hybrid method may be required to completely capture all relevant articles. The established database server located at https://relishdb.ict.griffith.edu.au is freely available for the downloading of annotation data and the blind testing of new methods. We expect that this benchmark will be useful for stimulating the development of new powerful techniques for title and title/abstract-based search engines for relevant articles in biomedical research.Peer reviewe

Invasive physiological indices to determine the functional significance of coronary stenosis

Physiological measurements are now commonly used to assess coronary lesions in the cardiac catheterisation laboratory, and this practice is evidence-based and supported by clinical guidelines. Fractional flow reserve is currently the gold standard method to determine whether coronary lesions are functionally significant, and is used to guide revascularization. There are however several other physiological measurements that have been proposed as alternatives to the fractional flow reserve. This review aims to comprehensively discuss physiological indices that can be used in the cardiac catheterisation laboratory to determine the functional significance of coronary lesions. We will focus on their advantages and disadvantages, and the current evidence supporting their use. Keywords: Coronary physiology, Fractional flow reserve, Resting physiological indices, Coronary flow reserv

Fractional flow reserve assessment of left main stenosis in the presence of downstream coronary stenoses

Background.Several studies have shown that fractional flow reserve (FFR) measurement can aid in the assessment of left main coronary stenosis. However, the impact of downstream epicardial stenosis on left main FFR assessment with the pressure wire in the nonstenosed downstream vessel remains unknown. Methods and Results.Variable stenoses were created in the left main coronary arteries and downstream epicardial vessels in 6 anaesthetized male sheep using balloon catheters. A total of 220 pairs of FFR assessments of the left main stenosis were obtained, before and after creation of a stenosis in a downstream epicardial vessel, by having a pressure-sensor wire in the other nonstenosed downstream vessel. The apparent left main FFR in the presence of downstream stenosis (FFRapp) was significantly higher compared with the true FFR in the absence of downstream stenosis (FFRtrue; 0.80±0.05 versus 0.76±0.05; estimate of the mean difference, 0.035; P0.80, 9% were associated with an FFRtrue of <0.75. In all instances, the epicardial lesion was in the proximal portion of the stenosed vessel, and the epicardial FFR (combined FFR of the left main and downstream stenosed vessel) was .0.50. Conclusions.A clinically relevant effect on the FFR assessment of left main disease with the pressure wire in a nonstenosed downstream vessel occurs only when the stenosis in the other vessel is proximal and very severe

The impact of age on fractional flow reserve-guided percutaneous coronary intervention: A FAME (Fractional Flow Reserve versus Angiography for Multivessel Evaluation) trial substudy

Background Fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) improved outcomes compared with an angiography-guided strategy in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD). However, the effect of age on FFR has not been well-studied. We aimed to evaluate the impact of age on the favorable results of routine FFR-guided PCI for multivessel CAD. Methods We compared 1 year outcomes between FFR-guided PCI and angiography-guided PCI in the 512 patients enrolled in the FAME study < 65 years old compared to the 493 patients ≥ 65 years old. We also evaluated the effect of age on the FFR result of varying degrees of visually estimated coronary stenosis. Results The 1-year rate of death, myocardial infarction or repeat revascularization in the angiography-guided group tended to be higher than in the FFR-guided group for both those patients < 65 (17.2% vs. 12.0%, P = 0.098) and those ≥ 65 years old (19.7% vs. 14.3%, P = 0.111) with no significant interaction based on age (P = 0.920). Older patients had higher FFR in vessels with 50% to 70% stenosis (0.83 ± 0.11 vs. 0.80 ± 0.13, P = 0.028) and in vessels with 71% to 90% stenosis (0.69 ± 0.15 vs. 0.65 ± 0.16, P = 0.002). The proportion of functionally significant lesions (FFR ≤ 0.80) in vessels with 71% to 90% stenosis was significantly lower in elderly compared to younger patients (75.3% vs. 84.1%, P = 0.013). Conclusions FFR-guided PCI is beneficial regardless of age, however, older patients have fewer functionally significant lesions, despite a similar angiographic appearance

Response to letter regarding article, "fractional flow reserve assessment of left main stenosis in the presence of downstream coronary stenoses"

Not available

The impact of sex differences on fractional flow reserve-guided percutaneous coronary intervention: A FAME (Fractional Flow Reserve Versus Angiography for Multivessel Evaluation) substudy

Objectives: This study sought to evaluate the impact of sex differences on fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Background: The FAME (Fractional Flow Reserve Versus Angiography for Multivessel Evaluation) study demonstrated that FFR-guided PCI improves outcomes compared with an angiography-guided strategy. The role of FFR-guided PCI in women versus men has not been evaluated. Methods: We analyzed 2-year data from the FAME study in the 744 men and 261 women with multivessel coronary disease, who were randomized to angiography- or FFR-guided PCI. Statistical comparisons based on sex were stratified by treatment method. Results: Although women were older and had significantly higher rates of hypertension than men did, there were no differences in the rates of major adverse cardiac events (20.3% vs. 20.2%, p = 0.923) and its individual components at 2 years. FFR values were significantly higher in women than in men (0.75 ± 0.18 vs. 0.71 ± 0.17, p = 0.001). The proportion of functionally significant lesions (FFR ≤ 0.80) was lower in women than in men for lesions with 50% to 70% stenosis (21.1% vs. 39.5%, p < 0.001) and for lesions with 70% to 90% stenosis (71.9% vs. 82.0%, p = 0.019). An FFR-guided strategy resulted in similar relative risk reductions for death, myocardial infarction, and repeat revascularization in men and in women. There were no interactions between sex and treatment method for any outcome variables. Conclusions: In comparison with men, angiographic lesions of similar severity are less likely to be ischemia-producing in women. An FFR-guided PCI strategy is equally beneficial in women as it is in men