Correlation between optical coherence tomography-derived intraluminal parameters and fractional flow reserve measurements in intermediate grade coronary lesions: a comparison between diabetic and non-diabetic patients
- 268 Downloads
Fractional flow reserve (FFR) measurements accurately assess functional relevance in intermediate grade coronary lesions. A significant relationship between hemodynamic stenosis severity and optical coherence tomography (OCT)-derived intraluminal dimensions has recently been demonstrated. However, morphologic thresholds to identify significant stenoses are variable and exploration of this correlation in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) remains currently incomplete. This study aimed at comparing the diagnostic value of intraluminal parameters as determined by OCT to predict FFR ≤0.8 in lesions of patients with versus without DM.
In 100 patients (DM = 56, non-DM = 44) with 142 coronary de novo lesions (DM = 80, non-DM = 62) of intermediate grade as determined by quantitative coronary angiography, we performed OCT and FFR. Stenoses were defined functionally relevant if FFR was ≤0.8.
FFR measurements in the overall study cohort, the DM and the non-DM group correlated significantly with minimal lumen area (MLA) [overall: r 2 = 0.339, DM: r 2 = 0.341, non-DM: r 2 = 0.355 (all p < 0.001)], percent area stenosis [overall: r 2 = 0.352, DM: r 2 = 0.376, non-DM: r 2 = 0.351 (all p < 0.001)] and minimal lumen diameter [overall: r 2 = 0.333, DM: r 2 = 0.277, non-DM: r 2 = 0.417 (all p < 0.001)] without differing statistically between diabetic and non-diabetic patients (p = ns).
Receiver operating characteristic analysis demonstrated that among OCT-derived parameters, MLA predicted FFR ≤0.8 with the best diagnostic efficiency and with similar cut-off values for all patients [area under the curve (AUC) = 0.836, 95 % confidence interval (CI) = 0.772–0.901, cut-off value = 1.64 mm2] as well as for diabetic (AUC = 0.840, 95 % CI = 0.754–0.927, cut-off value = 1.59 mm2) and non-diabetic subjects (AUC = 0.833, 95 % CI = 0.734–0.932, cut-off value = 1.64 mm2).
In both, diabetic and non-diabetic patients, FFR and OCT-derived intraluminal measurements are significantly correlated and OCT predicts hemodynamically relevant coronary stenosis with moderate diagnostic efficiency.
KeywordsQuantitative coronary angiography Minimal lumen area Optical coherence tomography Fractional flow reserve Type 2 diabetes mellitus
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- 2.Akin I, Nienaber CA, Richardt G, Tolg R, Hochadel M, Schneider S, Senges J, Tebbe U, Zeymer U, Sabin G, Kuck KH, Bergmann MW (2014) Risk factors for clinical events at 1-year follow-up after drug-eluting stent implantation: results from the prospective multicenter German DES.DE registry. Clin Res Cardiol 103(5):363–372PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 3.Tonino PA, De Bruyne B, Pijls NH, Siebert U, Ikeno F, van’ t Veer M, Klauss V, Manoharan G, Engstrom T, Oldroyd KG, Ver Lee PN, MacCarthy PA, Fearon WF (2009) Fractional flow reserve versus angiography for guiding percutaneous coronary intervention. N Engl J Med 360(3):213–224PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 6.Dominguez-Franco AJ, Jimenez-Navarro MF, Munoz-Garcia AJ, Alonso-Briales JH, Hernandez-Garcia JM, Galvan Ede T (2008) Long-term prognosis in diabetic patients in whom revascularization is deferred following fractional flow reserve assessment. Rev Esp Cardiol 61(4):352–359PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 9.Akin I, Bufe A, Schneider S, Reinecke H, Eckardt L, Richardt G, Burska D, Senges J, Kuck KH, Nienaber CA (2010) Clinical outcomes in diabetic and non-diabetic patients with drug-eluting stents: results from the first phase of the prospective multicenter German DES.DE registry. Clin Res Cardiol 99(6):393–400PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 10.Tearney GJ, Regar E, Akasaka T, Adriaenssens T, Barlis P, Bezerra HG, Bouma B, Bruining N, Cho JM, Chowdhary S, Costa MA, de Silva R, Dijkstra J, Di Mario C, Dudek D, Falk E, Feldman MD, Fitzgerald P, Garcia-Garcia HM, Gonzalo N, Granada JF, Guagliumi G, Holm NR, Honda Y, Ikeno F, Kawasaki M, Kochman J, Koltowski L, Kubo T, Kume T, Kyono H, Lam CC, Lamouche G, Lee DP, Leon MB, Maehara A, Manfrini O, Mintz GS, Mizuno K, Morel MA, Nadkarni S, Okura H, Otake H, Pietrasik A, Prati F, Raber L, Radu MD, Rieber J, Riga M, Rollins A, Rosenberg M, Sirbu V, Serruys PW, Shimada K, Shinke T, Shite J, Siegel E, Sonoda S, Suter M, Takarada S, Tanaka A, Terashima M, Thim T, Uemura S, Ughi GJ, van Beusekom HM, van der Steen AF, van Es GA, van Soest G, Virmani R, Waxman S, Weissman NJ, Weisz G (2012) Consensus standards for acquisition, measurement, and reporting of intravascular optical coherence tomography studies: a report from the International Working Group for Intravascular Optical Coherence Tomography Standardization and Validation. J Am Coll Cardiol 59(12):1058–1072PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 11.Kang SJ, Ahn JM, Song H, Kim WJ, Lee JY, Park DW, Yun SC, Lee SW, Kim YH, Lee CW, Park SW, Park SJ (2012) Usefulness of minimal luminal coronary area determined by intravascular ultrasound to predict functional significance in stable and unstable angina pectoris. Am J Cardiol 109(7):947–953PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 12.Takagi A, Tsurumi Y, Ishii Y, Suzuki K, Kawana M, Kasanuki H (1999) Clinical potential of intravascular ultrasound for physiological assessment of coronary stenosis: relationship between quantitative ultrasound tomography and pressure-derived fractional flow reserve. Circulation 100(3):250–255PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 13.Briguori C, Anzuini A, Airoldi F, Gimelli G, Nishida T, Adamian M, Corvaja N, Di Mario C, Colombo A (2001) Intravascular ultrasound criteria for the assessment of the functional significance of intermediate coronary artery stenoses and comparison with fractional flow reserve. Am J Cardiol 87(2):136–141PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 14.Ben-Dor I, Torguson R, Gaglia MA Jr, Gonzalez MA, Maluenda G, Bui AB, Xue Z, Satler LF, Suddath WO, Lindsay J, Pichard AD, Waksman R (2011) Correlation between fractional flow reserve and intravascular ultrasound lumen area in intermediate coronary artery stenosis. Eurointervention 7(2):225–233PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 15.Gonzalo N, Escaned J, Alfonso F, Nolte C, Rodriguez V, Jimenez-Quevedo P, Banuelos C, Fernandez-Ortiz A, Garcia E, Hernandez-Antolin R, Macaya C (2012) Morphometric assessment of coronary stenosis relevance with optical coherence tomography: a comparison with fractional flow reserve and intravascular ultrasound. J Am Coll Cardiol 59(12):1080–1089PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 16.Shiono Y, Kitabata H, Kubo T, Masuno T, Ohta S, Ozaki Y, Sougawa H, Orii M, Shimamura K, Ishibashi K, Komukai K, Yamano T, Tanimoto T, Ino Y, Yamaguchi T, Hirata K, Mizukoshi M, Imanishi T, Akasaka T (2012) Optical coherence tomography-derived anatomical criteria for functionally significant coronary stenosis assessed by fractional flow reserve. Circ J 76(9):2218–2225PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 18.Zafar H, Ullah I, Dinneen K, Matiullah S, Hanley A, Leahy MJ, Sharif F (2014) Evaluation of hemodynamically severe coronary stenosis as determined by fractional flow reserve with frequency domain optical coherence tomography measured anatomical parameters. J Cardiol 64(1):19–24PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 19.Reith S, Battermann S, Jaskolka A, Lehmacher W, Hoffmann R, Marx N, Burgmaier M (2013) Relationship between optical coherence tomography derived intraluminal and intramural criteria and haemodynamic relevance as determined by fractional flow reserve in intermediate coronary stenoses of patients with type 2 diabetes. Heart 99(10):700–707PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 20.Reiber JH, Serruys PW, Kooijman CJ, Wijns W, Slager CJ, Gerbrands JJ, Schuurbiers JC, den Boer A, Hugenholtz PG (1985) Assessment of short-, medium-, and long-term variations in arterial dimensions from computer-assisted quantitation of coronary cineangiograms. Circulation 71(2):280–288PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 24.Nallamothu BK, Spertus JA, Lansky AJ, Cohen DJ, Jones PG, Kureshi F, Dehmer GJ, Drozda JP Jr, Walsh MN, Brush JE Jr, Koenig GC, Waites TF, Gantt DS, Kichura G, Chazal RA, O’Brien PK, Valentine CM, Rumsfeld JS, Reiber JH, Elmore JG, Krumholz RA, Weaver WD, Krumholz HM (2013) Comparison of clinical interpretation with visual assessment and quantitative coronary angiography in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention in contemporary practice: the Assessing Angiography (A2) project. Circulation 127(17):1793–1800PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 25.De Bruyne B, Pijls NH, Kalesan B, Barbato E, Tonino PA, Piroth Z, Jagic N, Mobius-Winkler S, Rioufol G, Witt N, Kala P, MacCarthy P, Engstrom T, Oldroyd KG, Mavromatis K, Manoharan G, Verlee P, Frobert O, Curzen N, Johnson JB, Juni P, Fearon WF (2012) Fractional flow reserve-guided PCI versus medical therapy in stable coronary disease. N Engl J Med 367(11):991–1001PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 31.Leone AM, Porto I, De Caterina AR, Basile E, Aurelio A, Gardi A, Russo D, Laezza D, Niccoli G, Burzotta F, Trani C, Mazzari MA, Mongiardo R, Rebuzzi AG, Crea F (2012) Maximal hyperemia in the assessment of fractional flow reserve: intracoronary adenosine versus intracoronary sodium nitroprusside versus intravenous adenosine: the NASCI (Nitroprussiato versus Adenosina nelle Stenosi Coronariche Intermedie) study. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 5(4):402–408PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar