The efficacy and safety of quantitative flow ratio-guided complete revascularization in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease: A pilot randomized controlled trial

Prognostic role of discordance between quantitative flow ratio and visual estimation in revascularization guidance

Aims

Revascularization guided by functional severity has presented improved outcomes compared with visual angiographic guidance. Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) is a reliable angiography-based method for functional assessment. We sought to investigate the prognostic value of discordance between QFR and visual estimation in coronary revascularization guidance.

Methods and results

We performed offline QFR analysis on all-comers undergoing coronary angiography. Vessels with calculated QFR were divided into four groups based on the decision to perform or defer percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and on the QFR result, i.e.: Group A (PCI-, QFR > 0.8); Group B (PCI+, QFR ≤ 0.8); Group C (PCI+, QFR > 0.8); Group D (PCI-, QFR ≤ 0.8). Patients with at least one vessel falling within the disagreement groups formed the discordance group, whereas the remaining patients formed the concordance group. The primary endpoint was the composite endpoint of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and ischaemia-driven revascularization. Overall, 546 patients were included in the study. Discordance between QFR and visual estimation was found in 26.2% of patients. After a median follow-up period of 2.5 years, the discordance group had a significantly higher rate of the composite outcome (hazard ratio: 3.34, 95% confidence interval 1.99-5.60, P < 0.001). Both disagreement vessel Groups C and D were associated with increased cardiovascular risk compared with agreement Groups A and B.

Conclusion

Discordance between QFR and visual estimation in revascularization guidance was associated with a worse long-term prognosis. Our results highlight the importance of proper patient selection for intervention and the need to avoid improper stent implantations when not dictated by a comprehensive functional assessment.

Complete Percutaneous Coronary Revascularization in Acute Coronary Syndromes With Multivessel Coronary Disease: A Systematic Review

Multivessel disease (MVD) affects approximately 50% of patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) and is significantly burdened by poor outcomes and high mortality. It represents a clinical challenge in patient management and decision making and subtends an evolving research area related to the pathophysiology of unstable plaques and local or systemic inflammation. The benefits of complete revascularization are established in hemodynamically stable ACS patients with MVD, and guidelines provide some reference points to inform clinical practice, based on an evidence level that is solid for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and less robust for non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock. However, several areas of uncertainty remain, such as the optimal timing for complete revascularization or the best guiding strategy for intermediate stenoses. We performed a systematic review of current evidence in the field of percutaneous revascularization in ACS and MVD, also including future perspectives from ongoing trials that will directly compare different timing strategies and investigate the role of invasive and noninvasive guidance techniques. (Complete percutaneous coronary revascularization in patients with acute myocardial infarction and multivessel disease; CRD42022383123).

Practical Application of Coronary Physiologic Assessment: Asia-Pacific Expert Consensus Document: Part 1

Coronary physiologic assessment is performed to measure coronary pressure, flow, and resistance or their surrogates to enable the selection of appropriate management strategy and its optimization for patients with coronary artery disease. The value of physiologic assessment is supported by a large body of evidence that has led to major recommendations in clinical practice guidelines. This expert consensus document aims to convey practical and balanced recommendations and future perspectives for coronary physiologic assessment for physicians and patients in the Asia-Pacific region based on updated information in the field that including both wire- and image-based physiologic assessment. This is Part 1 of the whole consensus document, which describes the general concept of coronary physiology, as well as practical information on the clinical application of physiologic indices and novel image-based physiologic assessment.

Complete revascularization based on angiography derived fractional flow reserve versus incomplete revascularization in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction

BACKGROUND

Nearly half of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients present with significant multivessel coronary artery disease, they are at high risk of subsequent adverse events. Whether complete revascularization guided by coronary angiography-derived fractional flow reserve (caFFR) further reduces such events risk is not fully investigated.

METHODS

In this study, 367 consecutive STEMI patients who underwent successful primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) were enrolled. caFFR of all three coronary vessels were measured, including 367 culprit vessels and 703 non-culprit vessels. Complete revascularization was defined as post-PCI caFFR > 0.8 of all three coronary vessels. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE, a composite of cardiovascular death, non-fatal recurrent myocardial infarction, ischemia-driven revascularization and non-fatal stroke/transient ischemic attacks) during follow-up.

RESULTS

At a median follow-up of 3.8 years, MACE had occurred in 39 patients of the 220 (17.7%) in the complete revascularization group as compared with 49 patients of the 131 (37.4%) in the incomplete revascularization group (hazard ratio [HR] 1.9; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.2-3.0; p = 0.005). The incomplete revascularization in culprit vessels evaluated by caFFR showed the highest risk for MACE occurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

In STEMI patients with multivessel coronary artery disease, incomplete revascularization based on caFFR might contribute to identifying patients at high-risk.

Quantitative flow ratio vs. angiography-only guided PCI in STEMI patients: one-year cardiovascular outcomes

BACKGROUND

Coronary physiology-guided PCIs are recommended worldwide. However, invasive coronary physiology methods prolong the procedure, create additional risks for the patients, and prolong the fluoroscopy time for an interventional cardiologist. Otherwise, there is a noninvasive coronary physiology evaluation method, QFR, that can be safely used even in STEMI patients.

METHODS

A total of 198 patients admitted with STEMI and at least one intermediate (35-75%) diameter stenosis other than the culprit artery between July 2020 and June 2021 were prospectively included in this single-center study. All patients were randomized into one of two groups (1 - QFR-guided PCI; 2 - visual-estimation-only guided PCI). A 12-month follow-up with echocardiography, exercise stress test, and quality of life evaluation was performed in all included patients. For the QOF evaluation, the Seattle Angina Score Questionnaire was chosen. Statistical analysis was performed using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, Student's t-test, Mann-Whitney U test, Pearson's chi-squared test and Kaplan-Meier estimator.

RESULTS

Ninety-eight (49.5%) patients were randomized to the first group, and 100 (50.5%) patients were included in the second group. Statistically, significantly more patients had a medical history of dyslipidemia (98 vs. 91, p = 0.002) and slightly better left ventricular ejection fraction (42.21 ± 7.88 vs. 39.45 ± 9.62, p = 0.045) in the QFR group. Six fewer patients required non-culprit artery revascularization within the 12-month FU in the QFR group (1.02% vs. 6%, p = 0.047). Survival analysis proved that patients in the Angio group had a more than 6-fold greater risk for death within a 12-month period after MI (OR 6.23, 95% CI 2.20-17.87, p = 0.006), with the highest mortality risk within the first two months after initial treatment.

CONCLUSION

Using QFR in non-culprit lesions in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction reduces mortality and revascularization at the 12-month follow-up and improves the quality of life of the patient.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study was approved by the Regional Bioethical Committee and conducted under the principles of the Helsinki Declaration and local laws and regulations.

Physiologic Lesion Assessment to Optimize Multivessel Disease

Purpose of Review

Multivessel coronary artery disease, defined as significant stenosis in two or more major coronary arteries, is associated with high morbidity and mortality. The diagnosis and treatment of multivessel disease have evolved in the PCI era from solely a visual estimation of ischemic risk to a functional evaluation during angiography. This review summarizes the evidence and discusses the commonly used methods of multivessel coronary artery stenosis physiologic assessment.

Recent Findings

While FFR remains the gold standard in coronary physiologic assessment, several pressure-wire-based non-hyperemic indices of functional stenosis have been developed and validated as well as wire-free angiographically derived quantitative flow ratio. Identifying and treating functionally significant coronary atherosclerotic lesions reduce symptoms and major adverse cardiovascular events.

Summary

Coronary physiologic assessment in multivessel disease minimizes the observer bias in visual estimates of stenosis, changes clinical management, and improves patient outcomes.