Performance of quantitative flow ratio in patients with aortic stenosis undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Consensus document on the clinical application of invasive functional coronary angiography from the Japanese Association of Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics

Invasive functional coronary angiography (FCA), an angiography-derived physiological index of the functional significance of coronary obstruction, is a novel physiological assessment tool for coronary obstruction that does not require the utilization of a pressure wire. This technology enables operators to rapidly evaluate the functional relevance of coronary stenoses during and even after angiography while reducing the burden of cost and complication risks related to the pressure wire. FCA can be used for treatment decision-making for revascularization, strategy planning for percutaneous coronary intervention, and procedure optimization. Currently, various software-computing FCAs are available worldwide, with unique features in their computation algorithms and functions. With the emerging application of this novel technology in various clinical scenarios, the Japanese Association of Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics task force was created to outline expert consensus on the clinical use of FCA. This consensus document advocates optimal clinical applications of FCA according to currently available evidence while summarizing the concept, history, limitations, and future perspectives of FCA along with globally available software.

Diagnostic accuracy of Murray law-based quantitative flow ratio in patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement

BACKGROUND

Murray law-based quantitative flow ratio (μQFR) is a novel computational method that enables accurate estimation of fractional flow reserve (FFR) using a single angiographic projection. However, its diagnostic value in patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) remains unclear.

METHOD

We included 25 consecutive patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) for severe AS with intermediate or greater (30-90%) coronary artery disease (CAD). Pre- and post-TAVR μQFR, QFR, instantaneous flow reserve (iFR), and post-TAVR invasive FFR values were measured. We evaluated the diagnostic performance of pre-TAVR μQFR, QFR, and iFR using post-TAVR FFR ≤ 0.80 as a reference standard of ischemia.

RESULT

Pre-TAVR μQFR was significantly correlated with post-TAVR FFR (r = 0.73, p < 0.0001). The area under the curve of pre-TAVR μQFR on post-TAVR FFR ≤ 0.8 was 0.91 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.77-0.98), comparable to that of pre-TAVR iFR (0.86 [95% CI 0.71-0.98], p = 0.97). The accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of pre-TAVR μQFR on post-TAVR FFR ≤ 0.8 were 84.2% (95% CI 68.7-93.4), 61.6% (95% CI 31.6-86.1), 96.0% (95% CI 79.6-99.9), 88.9% (95% CI 52.9-98.3), and 82.8% (95% CI 70.6-90.6), respectively. For pre-TAVR iFR, these values were 76.5% (95% CI 58.8-89.3), 90.9% (95% CI 58.7-99.8), 69.6% (95% CI 47.1-86.8), 58.8% (95% CI 42.8-73.1), and 94.1% (95% CI 70.8-99.1), respectively.

CONCLUSION

μQFR could be useful for the physiological evaluation of patients with severe AS with concomitant CAD.

Integrated Assessment of Computational Coronary Physiology From a Single Angiographic View in Patients Undergoing TAVI

BACKGROUND

Angiography-derived computational physiology is an appealing alternative to pressure-wire coronary physiology assessment. However, little is known about its reliability in the setting of severe aortic stenosis. This study sought to provide an integrated assessment of epicardial and microvascular coronary circulation by means of single-view angiography-derived physiology in patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI).

METHODS

Pre-TAVI angiographic projections of 198 stenotic coronary arteries (123 patients) were analyzed by means of Murray's law-based quantitative flow ratio and angiography microvascular resistance. Wire-based reference measurements were available for comparison: fractional flow reserve (FFR) in all cases, instantaneous wave-free ratio in 148, and index of microvascular resistance in 42 arteries.

RESULTS

No difference in terms of the number of ischemia-causing stenoses was detected between FFR ≤0.80 and Murray's law-based quantitative flow ratio ≤0.80 (19.7% versus 19.2%; P=0.899), while this was significantly higher when instantaneous wave-free ratio ≤0.89 (44.6%; P=0.001) was used. The accuracy of Murray's law-based quantitative flow ratio ≤0.80 in predicting pre-TAVI FFR ≤0.80 was significantly higher than the accuracy of instantaneous wave-free ratio ≤0.89 (93.4% versus 77.0%; P=0.001), driven by a higher positive predictive value (86.9% versus 50%). Similar findings were observed when considering post-TAVI FFR ≤0.80 as reference. In 82 cases with post-TAVI angiographic projections, Murray's law-based quantitative flow ratio values remained stable, with a low rate of reclassification of stenosis significance (9.9%), similar to FFR and instantaneous wave-free ratio. Angiography microvascular resistance demonstrated a significant correlation (Rho=0.458; P=0.002) with index of microvascular resistance, showing an area under the curve of 0.887 (95% CI, 0.752-0.964) in predicting index of microvascular resistance ≥25.

CONCLUSIONS

Angiography-derived physiology provides a valid, reliable, and systematic assessment of the coronary circulation in a complex scenario, such as severe aortic stenosis.

Applied coronary physiology for planning and guidance of percutaneous coronary interventions. A clinical consensus statement from the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) of the European Society of Cardiology

The clinical value of fractional flow reserve and non-hyperaemic pressure ratios are well established in determining an indication for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). In addition, over the last 5 years we have witnessed a shift towards the use of physiology to enhance procedural planning, assess post-PCI functional results, and guide PCI optimisation. In this regard, clinical studies have reported compelling data supporting the use of longitudinal vessel analysis, obtained with pressure guidewire pullbacks, to better understand how obstructive CAD contributes to myocardial ischaemia, to establish the likelihood of functionally successful PCI, to identify the presence and location of residual flow-limiting stenoses and to predict long-term outcomes. The introduction of new functional coronary angiography tools, which merge angiographic information with fluid dynamic equations to deliver information equivalent to intracoronary pressure measurements, are now available and potentially also applicable to these endeavours. Furthermore, the ability of longitudinal vessel analysis to predict the functional results of stenting has played an integral role in the evolving field of simulated PCI. Nevertheless, it is important to have an awareness of the value and challenges of physiology-guided PCI in specific clinical and anatomical contexts. The main aim of this European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions clinical consensus statement is to offer up-to-date evidence and expert opinion on the use of applied coronary physiology for procedural PCI planning, disease pattern recognition and post-PCI optimisation.

Current status and future perspectives of fractional flow reserve derived from invasive coronary angiography

Assessment of the functional significance of coronary artery stenosis using invasive measurement of fractional flow reserve (FFR) or non-hyperemic indices has been shown to be safe and effective in making clinical decisions on whether to perform percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Despite strong evidence from clinical trials, utilization of these techniques is still relatively low worldwide. This may be to some extent attributed to factors that are inherent to invasive measurements like prolongation of the procedure, side effects of drugs that induce hyperemia, additional steps that the operator should perform, the possibility to damage the vessel with the wire, and additional costs. During the last few years, there was a growing interest in the non-invasive assessment of coronary artery lesions, which may provide interventionalist with important physiological information regarding lesion severity and overcome some of the limitations. Several dedicated software solutions are available on the market that could provide an estimation of FFR using 3D reconstruction of the interrogated vessel derived from two separated angiographic projections taken during diagnostic coronary angiography. Furthermore, some of them use data about aortic pressure and frame count to more accurately calculate pressure drop (and FFR). The ideal non-invasive system should be integrated into the workflow of the cath lab and performed online (during the diagnostic procedure), thereby not prolonging procedural time significantly, and giving the operator additional information like vessel size, lesion length, and possible post-PCI FFR value. Following the development of these technologies, they were all evaluated in clinical trials where good correlation and agreement with invasive FFR (considered the gold standard) were demonstrated. Currently, only one trial (FAVOR III China) with clinical outcomes was completed and demonstrated that QFR-guided PCI may provide better results at 1-year follow-up as compared to the angiography-guided approach. We are awaiting the results of a few other trials with clinical outcomes that test the performance of these indices in guiding PCI against either FFR or angiography-based approach, in various clinical settings. Herein we will present an overview of the currently available data, a critical review of the major clinical trials, and further directions of development for the five most widely available non-invasive indices: QFR, vFFR, FFRangio, caFFR, and AccuFFRangio.

Non-invasive Angiographic-based Fractional Flow Reserve: Technical Development, Clinical Implications, and Future Perspectives

New non- and less-invasive techniques have been developed to overcome the procedural and operator related burden of the fractional flow reserve (FFR) for the assessment of potentially significant stenosis in the coronary arteries. Virtual FFR-techniques can obviate the need for the additional flow or pressure wires as used for FFR measurements. This review provides an overview of the developments and validation of the virtual FFR-algorithms, states the challenges, discusses the upcoming clinical trials, and postulates the future role of virtual FFR in the clinical practice.

Comparison of FFR, iFR, and QFR assessment in patients with severe aortic stenosis and coronary heart disease

Introduction

Some patients with coronary heart disease are diagnosed with severe aortic stenosis. For further treatment, coronary angiography is performed in these patients. For intermediate lesions, obtaining coronary artery physiological data can facilitate clinical decision-making regarding revascularization.

Aim

The study compared the physiological significance of coronary artery stenosis using the fractional flow reserve (FFR) method with instantaneous wave-free pressure ratio (iFR) and quantitative flow ratio (QFR) in patients qualified for aortic valve replacement.

Material and methods

Data were collected on patients hospitalized in the years 2019–2020 at the 2^nd Department of Cardiology, University Hospital in Krakow.

Results

Twelve patients with severe aortic stenosis and borderline lesions in the coronary artery were qualified for physiological assessment. There were 6 women, whose mean age was 73.8 ±7.5 years. The mean left ventricular ejection fraction was 52 ±15%. The mean aortic valve area was 0.80 ±0.16 cm². The left anterior descending artery was assessed in 12 from 13 cases (92%). In comparison to FFR, all iFR measurements were concordant with FFR. The total agreement between QFR and FFR/iFR assessment was 69%.

Conclusions

Despite the controversy and uncertainty of some operators regarding the interpretation of the FFR test in patients with severe aortic stenosis, we obtained complete agreement of FFR with iFR assessment. This fact suggests that in patients with severe aortic stenosis the choice of an invasive method to assess the physiological significance of the stenosis in the coronary artery is not crucial – both iFR and FFR allow comparable results.

Angiography-Based Fractional Flow Reserve: State of the Art

Purpose of Review

Three-dimensional quantitative coronary angiography-based methods of fractional flow reserve (FFR) derivation have emerged as an appealing alternative to conventional pressure-wire-based physiological lesion assessment and have the potential to further extend the use of physiology in general. Here, we summarize the current evidence related to angiography-based FFR and perspectives on future developments.

Recent Findings

Growing evidence suggests good diagnostic performance of angiography-based FFR measurements, both in chronic and acute coronary syndromes, as well as in specific lesion subsets, such as long and calcified lesions, left main coronary stenosis, and bifurcations. More recently, promising results on the superiority of angiography-based FFR as compared to angiography-guided PCI have been published.

Summary

Currently available angiography -FFR indices proved to be an excellent alternative to invasive pressure wire-based FFR. Dedicated prospective outcome data comparing these indices to routine guideline recommended PCI including the use of FFR are eagerly awaited.

Long-Term Changes in Invasive Physiological Pressure Indices of Stenosis Severity Following Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation

BACKGROUND

Patients with severe aortic stenosis frequently have coexisting coronary artery disease. Invasive hyperemic and nonhyperemic pressure indices are used to assess coronary artery disease severity but have not been evaluated in the context of severe aortic stenosis.

METHODS

We compared lesion reclassification rates of fractional flow reserve (FFR) and resting full-cycle ratio (RFR) measured before and 6 months after transcatheter aortic valve implantation using the conventional clinical cutoffs of ≤0.80 for FFR and ≤0.89 for RFR. This was a substudy of the ongoing NOTION-3 trial (Third Nordic Aortic Valve Intervention). Two-dimensional quantitative coronary analysis was used to assess changes in angiographic lesion severity.

RESULTS

Forty patients were included contributing 50 lesions in which FFR was measured. In 32 patients (36 lesions), RFR was also measured. There was no significant change in diameter stenosis from baseline to follow-up, 49.8% (42.9%-57.1%) versus 52.3% (43.2%-57.8%), P=0.50. RFR improved significantly from 0.88 (0.83%-0.93) at baseline to 0.92 (0.83-0.95) at follow-up, P=0.003, whereas FFR remained unchanged, 0.84 (0.81-0.89) versus 0.86 (0.78-0.90), P=0.72. At baseline, 11 out of 50 (22%) lesions were FFR-positive, whereas 15 out of 50 (30%) were positive at follow-up, P=0.219. Corresponding numbers for RFR were 23 out of 36 (64%) at baseline and 12 out of 36 (33%) at follow-up, P=0.003.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with severe aortic stenosis, physiological assessment of coronary lesions with FFR before transcatheter aortic valve implantation leads to lower reclassification rate at 6-month follow-up, compared with RFR.

Angiography-based estimation of coronary physiology: A frame is worth a thousand words

Cumulative evidence has shown that coronary revascularization should be guided by functional significance of coronary lesions. Fractional flow reserve (FFR) is the gold standard for assessment of hemodynamic significance of coronary stenosis and FFR-guided percutaneous coronary intervention has improved clinical outcomes in patients with coronary artery disease. However, limitations of FFR such as increased operational time and cost, requirement of pressure wire and adenosine and technical difficulties have led to significant underutilization of the method in clinical practice. In the last few years, several methods of FFR estimation based on coronary angiography images have emerged to overcome invasive FFR limitations. The common elements of the novel indices include a 3D anatomical reconstruction of coronary vessels by angiographic projections and various approaches to fluid dynamics computation. Angiography-derived FFR methods have shown high diagnostic accuracy compared to invasive FFR. Although there are promising results regarding their prognostic role, large randomized trials evaluating clinical outcomes are lacking. The aim of this review is to present currently available angiography-derived FFR indices and highlight their differences, advantages, disadvantages and potential clinical implications.