Influence of contrast media dose and osmolality on the diagnostic performance of contrast fractional flow reserve

Background—Contrast fractional flow reserve (cFFR) is a method for assessing functional significance of coronary stenoses, which is more accurate than resting indices and does not require adenosine. However, contrast media volume and osmolality may affect the degree of hyperemia and therefore diagnostic performance. Methods and Results—cFFR, instantaneous wave–free ratio, distal pressure/aortic pressure at rest, and FFR were measured in 763 patients from 12 centers. We compared the diagnostic performance of cFFR between patients receiving low or iso-osmolality contrast (n=574 versus 189) and low or high contrast volume (n=341 versus 422) using FFR≤0.80 as a reference standard. The sensitivity, specificity, and overall accuracy of cFFR for the low versus iso-osmolality groups were 73%, 93%, and 85% versus 87%, 90%, and 89%, and for the low versus high contrast volume groups were 69%, 99%, and 83% versus 82%, 93%, and 88%. By receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analysis, cFFR provided better diagnostic performance than resting indices regardless of contrast osmolality and volume (P<0.001 for all groups). There was no significant difference between the area under the curve of cFFR in the low- and iso-osmolality groups (0.938 versus 0.957; P=0.40) and in the low- and high-volume groups (0.939 versus 0.949; P=0.61). Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that neither contrast osmolality nor volume affected the overall accuracy of cFFR; however, both affected the sensitivity and specificity. Conclusions—The overall accuracy of cFFR is greater than instantaneous wave–free ratio and distal pressure/aortic pressure and not significantly affected by contrast volume and osmolality. However, contrast volume and osmolality do affect the sensitivity and specificity of cFFR

Physiological predictors of acute coronary syndromes: emerging insights from the plaque to the vulnerable patient

In this review, the authors explore the evolving evidence linking physiological assessment of coronary artery disease with plaque progression and vulnerability. Reducing adverse clinical events remains the ultimate goal for diagnostic tests, and this review highlights evidence supporting the prognostic value of physiological metrics in predicting outcomes. Historical and contemporary studies support synergy among lesion severity, ischemia, plaque vulnerability, and patient prognosis. Ischemia contributes to clinical events through association with plaque burden, but this review addresses the emerging concept that it associates with atherothrombosis via disturbed lesion hemodynamics. Biomechanical pathophysiological forces including endothelial shear stress-the frictional force generated by blood flow on the vessel wall-are increasingly linked with atherogenesis, vulnerable plaque morphology, and platelet and leukocyte activation. The authors conclude by transitioning from the model of the vulnerable plaque to the concept of the "vulnerable patient," looking more broadly at physiological contributors to Virchow's triad underpinning acute coronary syndrome

Hyperdynamic Myocardial Response to Beta-Adrenergic Stimulation in Patients With Chest Pain and Normal Coronary Arteries

ObjectivesThe goal of this study was to test the hypothesis that an abnormal response to beta-adrenergic stimulation may play a role in the pathophysiology of chest pain in patients with normal coronary arteries.BackgroundThe mechanism of angina-like (AL) chest pain in patients with angiographically normal coronary arteries remains controversial.MethodsFifty-eight patients with AL pain and a normal coronary angiogram underwent dobutamine echocardiography (DE) to evaluate regional wall motion and intraventricular flow velocities (IFV). Control patients consisted of 22 matched patients free of angina and coronary artery disease. Abnormal IFV were defined as dagger-shaped Doppler spectrum ≥3 m/s.ResultsDobutamine-induced regional wall motion abnormalities did not develop in any of the patients. An IFV ≥ 3 m/s was found in 28 patients (48%) with AL pain but in only 4 (18%) control patients (p < 0.05). In the subgroup of patients with AL pain and IFV ≥3 m/s, plasma renin concentration (PRC) was higher as compared with those with IFV <3 m/s (18 ± 17 pg/ml vs. 9 ± 6 pg/ml, p < 0.05). There were no differences in plasma ADR, NADR, or angiotensin-converting enzyme levels. Fourteen patients with angina and IFV ≥3 underwent control DE and blood sampling after 6 weeks treatment with 10 mg of bisoprolol. In these patients, a decrease in IFV (from 3.4 ± 0.35 m/s to 2.46 ± 0.64 m/s, p < 0.001) and a decrease in angina score (from 5.4 ± 1.5 to 0.6 ± 1.4, p < 0.001) were observed at follow-up.ConclusionsThe present data suggest that an exaggerated myocardial response to beta-adrenergic stimulation plays a role in the mechanisms of chest pain in some patients with normal coronary arteries

Functional SYNTAX Score for Risk Assessment in Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease

ObjectivesThis study was aimed at investigating whether a fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guided SYNTAX score (SS), termed “functional SYNTAX score” (FSS), would predict clinical outcome better than the classic SS in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).BackgroundThe SS is a purely anatomic score based on the coronary angiogram and predicts outcome after PCI in patients with multivessel CAD. FFR-guided PCI improves outcomes by adding functional information to the anatomic information obtained from the angiogram.MethodsThe SS was prospectively collected in 497 patients enrolled in the FAME (Fractional Flow Reserve versus Angiography for Multivessel Evaluation) study. FSS was determined by only counting ischemia-producing lesions (FFR ≤0.80). The ability of each score to predict major adverse cardiac events (MACE) at 1 year was compared.ResultsThe 497 patients were divided into tertiles of risk based on the SS. After determining the FSS for each patient, 32% moved to a lower-risk group as follows. MACE occurred in 9.0%, 11.3%, and 26.7% of patients in the low-, medium-, and high-FSS groups, respectively (p < 0.001). Only FSS and procedure time were independent predictors of 1-year MACE. FSS demonstrated a better predictive accuracy for MACE compared with SS (Harrell's C of FSS, 0.677 vs. SS, 0.630, p = 0.02; integrated discrimination improvement of 1.94%, p < 0.001).ConclusionsRecalculating SS by only incorporating ischemia-producing lesions as determined by FFR decreases the number of higher-risk patients and better discriminates risk for adverse events in patients with multivessel CAD undergoing PCI. (Fractional Flow Reserve versus Angiography for Multivessel Evaluation [FAME]; NCT00267774