Effect of heart rate on hemodynamic endpoints under concomitant microvascular disease in a porcine model

Comparison Between 5- and 1-Year Outcomes Using Cutoff Values of Pressure Drop Coefficient and Fractional Flow Reserve for Diagnosing Coronary Artery Diseases

Background

The current pressure-based coronary diagnostic index, fractional flow reserve (FFR), has a limited efficacy in the presence of microvascular disease (MVD). To overcome the limitations of FFR, the objective is to assess the recently introduced pressure drop coefficient (CDP), a fundamental fluid dynamics-based combined pressure–flow index.

Methods

We hypothesize that CDP will result in improved clinical outcomes in comparison to FFR. To test the hypothesis, chi-square test was performed to compare the percent major adverse cardiac events (%MACE) at 5 years between (a) FFR < 0.75 and CDP > 27.9 and (b) FFR < 0.80 and CDP > 25.4 groups using a prospective cohort study. Furthermore, Kaplan–Meier survival curves were compared between the FFR and CDP groups. The results were considered statistically significant for p < 0.05. The outcomes of the CDP arm were presumptive as clinical decision was solely based on the FFR.

Results

For the complete patient group, the %MACE in the CDP > 27.9 group (10 out of 35, 29%) was lower in comparison to the FFR < 0.75 group (11 out of 20, 55%), and the difference was near significant (p = 0.05). The survival analysis showed a significantly higher survival rate (p = 0.01) in the CDP > 27.9 group (n = 35) when compared to the FFR < 0.75 group (n = 20). The results remained similar for the FFR = 0.80 cutoff. The comparison of the 5-year MACE outcomes with the 1-year outcomes for the complete patient group showed similar trends, with a higher statistical significance for a longer follow-up period of 5 years.

Conclusion

Based on the MACE and survival analysis outcomes, CDP could possibly be an alternate diagnostic index for decision-making in the cardiac catheterization laboratory.

Clinical Trial Registration

www.ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT01719016.

Delineation of epicardial stenosis in patients with microvascular disease using pressure drop coefficient: A pilot outcome study

AIM

To investigate the patient-outcomes of newly developed pressure drop coefficient (CDP) in diagnosing epicardial stenosis (ES) in the presence of concomitant microvascular disease (MVD).

METHODS

Patients from our clinical trial were divided into two subgroups with: (1) cut-off of coronary flow reserve (CFR) < 2.0; and (2) diabetes. First, correlations were performed for both subgroups between CDP and hyperemic microvascular resistance (HMR), a diagnostic parameter for assessing the severity of MVD. Linear regression analysis was used for these correlations. Further, in each of the subgroups, comparisons were made between fractional flow reserve (FFR) < 0.75 and CDP > 27.9 groups for assessing major adverse cardiac events (MACE: Primary outcome). Comparisons were also made between the survival curves for FFR < 0.75 and CDP > 27.9 groups. Two tailed chi-squared and Fischer’s exact tests were performed for comparison of the primary outcomes, and the log-rank test was used to compare the Kaplan-Meier survival curves. P < 0.05 for all tests was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Significant linear correlations were observed between CDP and HMR for both CFR < 2.0 (r = 0.58, P < 0.001) and diabetic (r = 0.61, P < 0.001) patients. In the CFR < 2.0 subgroup, the %MACE (primary outcomes) for CDP > 27.9 group (7.7%, 2/26) was lower than FFR < 0.75 group (3/14, 21.4%); P = 0.21. Similarly, in the diabetic subgroup, the %MACE for CDP > 27.9 group (12.5%, 2/16) was lower than FFR < 0.75 group (18.2%, 2/11); P = 0.69. Survival analysis for CFR < 2.0 subgroup indicated better event-free survival for CDP > 27.9 group (n = 26) when compared with FFR < 0.75 group (n = 14); P = 0.10. Similarly, for the diabetic subgroup, CDP > 27.9 group (n = 16) showed higher survival times compared to FFR group (n = 11); P = 0.58.

CONCLUSION

CDP correlated significantly with HMR and resulted in better %MACE as well as survival rates in comparison to FFR. These positive trends demonstrate that CDP could be a potential diagnostic endpoint for delineating MVD with or without ES.

THE MECHANICAL FACTORS INFLUENCING THE ASSESSMENT OF INTERMEDIATE STENOSIS SEVERITY EXPLAINED THROUGH FRACTIONAL FLOW RESERVE

Assessment of intermediate coronary lesions with diameter stenosis of 40% to 70% severity is being a challenge for cardiologist to identify potentially ischemic stenosis for revascularization and nonculprit stenosis which can be deferred from stenting. An invasive coronary angiography and intravascular ultrasound provide anatomic information of stenosis severity whereas an invasive fractional flow reserve index (FFR) provides the functional significance of the stenosis severity. The measurement of functional significance of stenosis severity minimizes the procedural complications such as coronary dissection, in stent restenosis etc. rather than anatomical significance measure. The FFR cutoff value of [Formula: see text]0.8 is used to distinguish ischemic and nonischemic stenosis. The FFR is clinically well validated even though it is influenced by the mechanical factors such as hyperemic flow and guide wire insertion. In recent times, noninvasive coronary computed tomography (CCTA) modality has become popular in the diagnosis of coronary artery disease. The CCTA permits the assessment of cross-sectional parameters such as minimum lumen area and lumen diameter, lesion length and plaque morphology. However, the CCTA provides limited information on the functional significance of stenotic lesions as compared to FFR. The purpose of this review is to discuss the mechanical factors influencing the invasive FFR while assessing the functional significance of intermediate stenosis severity. In addition, the hidden mechanical factors influencing the noninvasive CCTA assessment of stenosis severity will be discussed from the critical information obtained from FFR which could be beneficial for the clinician particularly in the assessment of intermediate stenosis severity.

Clinical outcomes of combined flow-pressure drop measurements using newly developed diagnostic endpoint: Pressure drop coefficient in patients with coronary artery dysfunction

AIM: To combine pressure and flow parameter, pressure drop coefficient (CDP) will result in better clinical outcomes in comparison to the fractional flow reserve (FFR) group.

METHODS: To test this hypothesis, a comparison was made between the FFR < 0.75 and CDP > 27.9 groups in this study, for the major adverse cardiac events [major adverse cardiac events (MACE): Primary outcome] and patients’ quality of life (secondary outcome). Further, a comparison was also made between the survival curves for the FFR < 0.75 and CDP > 27.9 groups. Two-tailed χ² test proportions were performed for the comparison of primary and secondary outcomes. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was performed to compare the survival curves of FFR < 0.75 and CDP > 27.9 groups (MedcalcV10.2, Mariakerke, Belgium). Results were considered statistically significant for P < 0.05.

RESULTS: The primary outcomes (%MACE) in the FFR < 0.75 group (20%, 4 out of 20) was not statistically different (P = 0.24) from the %MACE occurring in CDP > 27.9 group (8.57%, 2 out of 35). Noteworthy is the reduction in the %MACE in the CDP > 27.9 group, in comparison to the FFR < 0.75 group. Further, the secondary outcomes were not statistically significant between the FFR < 0.75 and CDP > 27.9 groups. Survival analysis results suggest that the survival time for the CDP > 27.9 group (n = 35) is significantly higher (P = 0.048) in comparison to the survival time for the FFR < 0.75 group (n = 20). The results remained similar for a FFR = 0.80 cut-off.

CONCLUSION: Based on the above, CDP could prove to be a better diagnostic end-point for clinical revascularization decision-making in the cardiac catheterization laboratories.

Diagnostic cutoff for pressure drop coefficient in relation to fractional flow reserve and coronary flow reserve: A patient-level analysis

OBJECTIVES AND BACKGROUND

Functional assessment of intermediate coronary stenosis during cardiac catheterization is conducted using diagnostic parameters like fractional flow reserve (FFR), coronary flow reserve (CFR), hyperemic stenosis resistance index (HSR), and hyperemic microvascular resistance (HMR). CDP (ratio of pressure drop across a stenosis to distal dynamic pressure), a nondimensional index derived from fundamental fluid dynamic principles, based on a combination of intracoronary pressure, and flow measurements may improve the functional assessment of coronary lesion severity.

METHODS

Patient-level data pertaining to 350 intracoronary pressure and flow measurements across coronary stenoses was assessed to evaluate CFR, FFR, HSR, HMR, and CDP. CDP was calculated as (ΔP)/(0.5 × ρ × APV(2)). The density of blood (ρ) was assumed to be 1.05 g/cm(3). The correlation of current diagnostic parameters (CFR, FFR, HSR, and HMR) with CDP was evaluated. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to identify the optimal cut-off point of CDP, corresponding to the clinically used cut-off values (FFR = 0.80 and CFR = 2.0).

RESULTS

CDP correlated significantly with FFR (r = 0.81, P < 0.05) and had significant diagnostic efficiency (ROC-area under curve of 86%), specificity (72%) and sensitivity (85%) at FFR < 0.8. The corresponding cut-off value for CDP to detect FFR < 0.8 was at CDP>25.4. CDP also correlated significantly (r = 0.98, P < 0.05) with epicardial-specific parameter, HSR.

CONCLUSIONS

CDP, a functional parameter based on both intracoronary pressure and flow measurements, has close agreement (area under ROC curve = 86%) with FFR, the frequently used method of evaluating stenosis severity.

Hyperemia-free delineation of epicardial and microvascular impairments using a basal index

The assessment of functional coronary lesion severity using intracoronary hemodynamic parameters like the pressure-derived fractional flow reserve and the flow-derived coronary flow reserve are known to rely critically on the establishment of maximal hyperemia. We evaluated a hyperemia-free index, basal pressure drop coefficient (bCDP), that combines pressure and velocity for simultaneous assessment of the status of both epicardial and microvascular circulations. In 23 pigs, simultaneous measurements of distal coronary arterial pressure and flow were performed using a dual-sensor tipped guidewire in the settings of both normal and abnormal microcirculation with the presence of epicardial lesions of area stenosis (AS) < 50% and AS > 50%. The bCDP, a parameter based on fundamental fluid dynamics principles, was calculated as the transtenotic pressure-drop divided by the dynamic pressure in the distal vessel, measured under baseline (without hyperemia) conditions. The group mean values of bCDP for normal (84 ± 18) and abnormal (124.5 ± 15.6) microcirculation were significantly different. Similarly, the mean values of bCDP from AS < 50% (72.5 ± 16.1) and AS > 50% (136 ± 17.2) were also significantly different (p < 0.05). The bCDP could significantly distinguish between lesions of AS < 50% to AS > 50% under normal microcirculation (52.1 vs. 85.8; p < 0.05) and abnormal microcirculation (84.9 vs. 172; p < 0.05). Further, the bCDP correlated linearly and significantly with the hyperemic parameters FFR (r = 0.42, p < 0.05) and CDP (r = 0.50, p < 0.05). The bCDP is a promising clinical diagnostic parameter that can independently assess the severity of epicardial stenosis and microvascular impairment. We believe that it has an immediate appeal for detection of coronary artery disease if validated clinically.

Diagnostic Uncertainties During Assessment of Serial Coronary Stenoses: An In Vitro Study

Currently, the diagnosis of coronary stenosis is primarily based on the well-established functional diagnostic parameter, fractional flow reserve (FFR: ratio of pressures distal and proximal to a stenosis). The threshold of FFR has a “gray” zone of 0.75–0.80, below which further clinical intervention is recommended. An alternate diagnostic parameter, pressure drop coefficient (CDP: ratio of trans-stenotic pressure drop to the proximal dynamic pressure), developed based on fundamental fluid dynamics principles, has been suggested by our group. Additional serial stenosis, present downstream in a single vessel, reduces the hyperemic flow, Q˜h, and pressure drop, Δp˜, across an upstream stenosis. Such hemodynamic variations may alter the values of FFR and CDP of the upstream stenosis. Thus, in the presence of serial stenoses, there is a need to evaluate the possibility of misinterpretation of FFR and test the efficacy of CDP of individual stenoses. In-vitro experiments simulating physiologic conditions, along with human data, were used to evaluate nine combinations of serial stenoses. Different cases of upstream stenosis (mild: 64% area stenosis (AS) or 40% diameter stenosis (DS); intermediate: 80% AS or 55% DS; and severe: 90% AS or 68% DS) were tested under varying degrees of downstream stenosis (mild, intermediate, and severe). The pressure drop-flow rate characteristics of the serial stenoses combinations were evaluated for determining the effect of the downstream stenosis on the upstream stenosis. In general, Q˜h and Δp˜ across the upstream stenosis decreased when the downstream stenosis severity was increased. The FFR of the upstream mild, intermediate, and severe stenosis increased by a maximum of 3%, 13%, and 19%, respectively, when the downstream stenosis severity increased from mild to severe. The FFR of a stand-alone intermediate stenosis under a clinical setting is reported to be ∼0.72. In the presence of a downstream stenosis, the FFR values of the upstream intermediate stenosis were either within (0.77 for 80%–64% AS and 0.79 for 80%–80% AS) or above (0.88 for 80%–90% AS) the “gray” zone (0.75–0.80). This artificial increase in the FFR value within or above the “gray” zone for an upstream intermediate stenosis when in series with a clinically relevant downstream stenosis could lead to misinterpretation of functional stenosis severity. In contrast, a distinct range of CDP values was observed for each case of upstream stenosis (mild: 8–10; intermediate: 47–54; and severe: 130–155). The nonoverlapping range of CDP could better delineate the effect of the downstream stenosis from the upstream stenosis and allow for the accurate diagnosis of the functional severity of the upstream stenosis.

Functional diagnosis of coronary stenoses using pressure drop coefficient: a pilot study in humans

OBJECTIVES AND BACKGROUND

Myocardial fractional flow reserve (FFR) in conjunction with coronary flow reserve (CFR) is used to evaluate the hemodynamic severity of coronary lesions. However, discordant results between FFR and CFR have been observed in intermediate coronary lesions. A functional parameter, pressure drop coefficient (CDP; ratio of pressure drop to distal dynamic pressure), was assessed using intracoronary pressure drop (dp) and average peak velocity (APV). The CDP is a nondimensional ratio, derived from fundamental fluid dynamic principles. We sought to evaluate the correlation of CDP with FFR, CFR, and hyperemic stenosis resistance (HSR: ratio of pressure drop to APV) in human subjects.

METHODS

Twenty-seven patients with reversible perfusion defects based on SPECT were consented for the study before cardiac catheterization. Distal coronary pressure and APV were measured simultaneously for each coronary lesion using a Combowire(©) during cardiac catheterization. Reference diameter, minimal lumen diameter, and %AS were obtained by quantitative coronary angiography. Maximum hyperemia was induced by IV adenosine (140 µg/kg/min). CDP was calculated as, (Δp)/(0.5 × ρ × APV(2) ). The density of blood (ρ) was assumed to be 1.05 gm/cm(3) .

RESULTS

The functional index, CDP, when correlated simultaneously with FFR and CFR, was found to have a significant correlation (r = 0.61; P < 0.05). Similarly a significant correlation was achieved when CDP was correlated with HSR (r = 0.91; P < 0.001). This is consistent with the definition of CDP, which is a functional parameter that includes both pressure and flow information.

CONCLUSIONS

CDP, a nondimensional parameter combining simultaneous measurements of pressure drop and velocity data, can accurately define the severity of coronary stenoses and could prove advantageous clinically.

Effect of myocardial contractility on hemodynamic end points under concomitant microvascular disease in a porcine model

In this study, coronary diagnostic parameters, pressure drop coefficient (CDP: ratio of trans-stenotic pressure drop to distal dynamic pressure), and lesion flow coefficient (LFC: ratio of % area stenosis (%AS) to the CDP at throat region), were evaluated to distinguish levels of %AS under varying contractility conditions, in the presence of microvascular disease (MVD). In 10 pigs, %AS and MVD were created using angioplasty balloons and 90-μm microspheres, respectively. Simultaneous measurements of pressure drop, left ventricular pressure (p), and velocity were obtained. Contractility was calculated as (dp/dt)max, categorized into low contractility <900 mmHg/s and high contractility >900 mmHg/s, and in each group, compared between %AS <50 and >50 using analysis of variance. In the presence of MVD, between the %AS <50 and >50 groups, values of CDP (71 ± 1.4 and 121 ± 1.3) and LFC (0.10 ± 0.04 and 0.19 ± 0.04) were significantly different (P < 0.05), under low-contractility conditions. A similar %AS trend was observed under high-contractility conditions (CDP: 18 ± 1.4 and 91 ± 1.4; LFC: 0.08 ± 0.04 and 0.25 ± 0.04). Under MVD conditions, similar to fractional flow reserve, CDP and LFC were not influenced by contractility.