Microcirculatory Function in Nonhypertrophic and Hypertrophic Myocardium in Patients With Aortic Valve Stenosis

Comparison of vessel fractional flow reserve with invasive resting full-cycle ratio in patients with intermediate coronary lesions

BACKGROUND

Vessel fractional flow reserve (vFFR) is a novel angiography-derived index for the assessment of myocardial ischemia without the need for pressure wires and hyperemic agents. vFFR has demonstrated very good diagnostic performance compared with the hyperemic index fractional flow reserve (FFR). The aim of this study was to compare vFFR to the non-hyperemic pressure ratio resting full-cycle ratio (RFR).

METHODS

This was a retrospective, observational, single-center study of an all-comer cohort undergoing RFR assessment. Invasive coronary angiography was obtained without a dedicated vFFR acquisition protocol, and vFFR calculation was attempted in all vessels interrogated by RFR (1483 lesions of 1030 patients).

RESULTS

vFFR could be analyzed in 986 lesions from 705 patients. Median diameter stenosis was 37% (interquartile range (IQR): 30.0-44.0%), vFFR 0.86 (IQR: 0.81-0.91) and RFR 0.94 (IQR: (0.90-0.97). The correlation between vFFR and RFR was strong (r = 0.70, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.66-0.74, p < 0.001). Using RFR ≤0.89 as reference, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and overall diagnostic accuracy for vFFR were 77%, 93%, 77%, and 92% and 89%. vFFR yielded a high area under the curve (AUC) of 0.92 (95% CI: 0.90-0.94). The good diagnostic performance of vFFR was confirmed among subgroups of patients with diabetes, severe aortic stenosis, female gender and lesions located in the left anterior descending artery.

CONCLUSION

vFFR has a high diagnostic performance taking RFR as the reference standard for evaluating the functional significance of coronary stenoses.

Comparison between the diagnostic performance of vessel fractional flow reserve and nonhyperemic pressure ratio for functionally significant coronary stenosis severity as assessed by fractional flow reserve

BACKGROUND

Fractional flow reserve (FFR) and nonhyperemic pressure ratios (NHPRs) have been widely used to assess the functional severity of coronary stenosis. However, their measurement requires using a pressure wire, making their use in all patients difficult. The recently developed vessel fractional flow reserve (vFFR), derived from three-dimensional quantitative coronary angiography, is expected to serve as a surrogate for pressure wire assessment.

METHODS

This retrospective study was conducted on patients with intermediate coronary stenosis who underwent FFR and NHPR measurements. The vFFR and NHPR values were compared for diagnosing coronary stenosis as defined by an FFR of ≤0.80, and the number of patients not requiring wire-based assessment was estimated.

RESULTS

In a total of 90 lesions from 74 patients (median [SD] age 75 [12] years; men 80%), the median FFR was 0.78 (0.72-0.84), and 57% of these lesions (N = 51) exhibited an FFR of ≤0.80. vFFR provided high discrimination for coronary stenosis (area under the curve 0.80, 95% confidence interval 0.70-0.90), which was comparable to that of NHPRs (p = 0.42). High diagnostic accuracy was consistently observed across a variety of clinical presentations (i.e., old age, diabetes, target coronary artery, and left ventricular hypertrophy) (p_interaction  > 0.05). In total, 55 lesions (61%) demonstrated positive or negative likelihood of coronary stenosis when vFFR was <0.73 (specificity 90%) or >0.87 (sensitivity 88%), respectively.

CONCLUSION

vFFR demonstrated excellent diagnostic performance for detecting functionally significant coronary stenosis as evaluated by FFR. vFFR may be used as a surrogate for pressure wire assessment.

Absolute coronary flow and microvascular resistance reserve in patients with severe aortic stenosis

BACKGROUND

Development of left ventricle (LV) hypertrophy in aortic stenosis (AS) is accompanied by adaptive coronary flow regulation. We aimed to assess absolute coronary flow, microvascular resistance, coronary flow reverse (CFR) and microvascular resistance reserve (MRR) in patients with and without AS.

METHODS

Absolute coronary flow and microvascular resistance were measured by continuous thermodilution in 29 patients with AS and 29 controls, without AS, matched for age, gender, diabetes and functional severity of epicardial coronary lesions. Myocardial work, total myocardial mass and left anterior descending artery (LAD)-specific mass were quantified by echocardiography and cardiac-CT.

RESULTS

Patients with AS presented a significantly positive LV remodelling with lower global longitudinal strain and global work efficacy compared with controls. Total LV myocardial mass and LAD-specific myocardial mass were significantly higher in patients with AS (p=0.001). Compared with matched controls, absolute resting flow in the LAD was significantly higher in the AS cohort (p=0.009), resulting into lower CFR and MRR in the AS cohort compared with controls (p<0.005 for both). No differences were found in hyperaemic flow and resting and hyperaemic resistances. Hyperaemic myocardial perfusion (calculated as the ratio between the absolute coronary flow subtended to the LAD, expressed in mL/min/g), but not resting, was significantly lower in the AS group (p=0.035).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with severe AS and non-obstructive coronary artery disease, with the progression of LV hypertrophy, the compensatory mechanism of increased resting flow maintains adequate perfusion at rest, but not during hyperaemia. As a consequence, both CFR and MRR are significantly impaired.