Advertisement

Heart and Vessels

, Volume 33, Issue 10, pp 1129–1138 | Cite as

Influence of visual–functional mismatch on coronary flow profiles after percutaneous coronary intervention: a propensity score-matched analysis

  • Masahiro Hoshino
  • Taishi Yonetsu
  • Tadashi Murai
  • Yoshihisa Kanaji
  • Eisuke Usui
  • Masahiro Hada
  • Rikuta Hamaya
  • Yoshinori Kanno
  • Tetsumin Lee
  • Tsunekazu Kakuta
Original Article

Abstract

The aims of this study are to clarify whether discrepancies between angiographic and fractional flow reserve (FFR) measurements (visual–functional mismatch) influence coronary flow profiles after percutaneous coronary intervention. While current guidelines FFR-guided revascularization, clinical practice most commonly relies on angiographic evaluation, which may under- or over-estimate the functional relevance of the lesion. Our retrospective analysis involved 274 vessels from 264 patients with stable angina pectoris who underwent FFR, index of microvascular resistance, and coronary flow reserve (CFR) measurements before and after PCI. Visual–functional concordance and discordance (reverse mismatch) were defined as angiographic stenosis > 50% with FFR ≤ 0.80 and angiographic stenosis ≤ 50% with FFR ≤ 0.80, respectively. Propensity score-matched cohort included 132 lesions (66 lesions: concordant findings, 66 lesions: reverse mismatch). The change in coronary flow profiles after PCI was assessed in terms of FFR, CFR, index of microvascular resistance (IMR), and mean transit time (Tmn). Compared with concordant territories, reverse mismatch territories were associated with lower pre-PCI IMR, higher pre-PCI CFR, greater minimum lumen diameter and smaller reference diameter (all comparisons, P < 0.05). After propensity score matching, the prevalence and extent of coronary flow improvement after PCI, evaluated by CFR and Tmn, were both remained significantly greater in concordant territories (all comparisons, P < 0.05). The prevalence and extent of coronary flow improvement after PCI assessed by the physiologic indices was significantly greater in visual–functional concordant lesions, suggesting that these coronary physiologic changes were associated with discrepancy between angiographic measurements.

Keywords

Fractional flow reserve Coronary flow reserve Microvascular function Percutaneous coronary intervention Coronary angiography 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors state that there are no relationships with industry.

Supplementary material

380_2018_1161_MOESM1_ESM.docx (25 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 25 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Wijns W, Kolh P, Danchin N, Di Mario C, Falk V, Folliguet T, Garg S, Huber K, James S, Knuuti J, Lopez-Sendon J, Marco J, Menicanti L, Ostojic M, Piepoli MF, Pirlet C, Pomar JL, Reifart N, Ribichini FL, Schalij MJ, Sergeant P, Serruys PW, Silber S, Sousa Uva M, Taggart D, Task Force on Myocardial Revascularization of the European Society of C, the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic S, European Association for Percutaneous Cardiovascular I (2010) Guidelines on myocardial revascularization. Eur Heart J 31:2501–2555CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Pijls NH, van Schaardenburgh P, Manoharan G, Boersma E, Bech JW, van’t Veer M, Bar F, Hoorntje J, Koolen J, Wijns W, de Bruyne B (2007) Percutaneous coronary intervention of functionally nonsignificant stenosis: 5-year follow-up of the DEFER Study. J Am Coll Cardiol 49:2105–2111CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Pijls NH, Fearon WF, Tonino PA, Siebert U, Ikeno F, Bornschein B, van’t Veer M, Klauss V, Manoharan G, Engstrom T, Oldroyd KG, Ver Lee PN, MacCarthy PA, De Bruyne B, Investigators FS (2010) Fractional flow reserve versus angiography for guiding percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease: 2-year follow-up of the FAME (Fractional Flow Reserve Versus Angiography for Multivessel Evaluation) study. J Am Coll Cardiol 56:177–184CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    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, Investigators FS (2009) Fractional flow reserve versus angiography for guiding percutaneous coronary intervention. N Engl J Med 360:213–224CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    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, Investigators FT (2012) Fractional flow reserve-guided PCI versus medical therapy in stable coronary disease. N Engl J Med 367:991–1001CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Tonino PA, Fearon WF, De Bruyne B, Oldroyd KG, Leesar MA, Ver Lee PN, Maccarthy PA, Van’t Veer M, Pijls NH (2010) Angiographic versus functional severity of coronary artery stenoses in the FAME study fractional flow reserve versus angiography in multivessel evaluation. J Am Coll Cardiol 55:2816–2821CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    van de Hoef TP, Echavarria-Pinto M, van Lavieren MA, Meuwissen M, Serruys PW, Tijssen JG, Pocock SJ, Escaned J, Piek JJ (2015) Diagnostic and prognostic implications of coronary flow capacity: a comprehensive cross-modality physiological concept in ischemic heart disease. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 8:1670–1680CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    van de Hoef TP, van Lavieren MA, Damman P, Delewi R, Piek MA, Chamuleau SA, Voskuil M, Henriques JP, Koch KT, de Winter RJ, Spaan JA, Siebes M, Tijssen JG, Meuwissen M, Piek JJ (2014) Physiological basis and long-term clinical outcome of discordance between fractional flow reserve and coronary flow velocity reserve in coronary stenoses of intermediate severity. Circ Cardiovasc Interv 7:301–311CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Escaned J, Echavarria-Pinto M (2014) Moving beyond coronary stenosis: has the time arrived to address important physiological questions not answered by fractional flow reserve alone? Circ Cardiovasc Interv 7:282–284CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Park SJ, Kang SJ, Ahn JM, Shim EB, Kim YT, Yun SC, Song H, Lee JY, Kim WJ, Park DW, Lee SW, Kim YH, Lee CW, Mintz GS, Park SW (2012) Visual-functional mismatch between coronary angiography and fractional flow reserve. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 5:1029–1036CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Aarnoudse W, Fearon WF, Manoharan G, Geven M, van de Vosse F, Rutten M, De Bruyne B, Pijls NH (2004) Epicardial stenosis severity does not affect minimal microcirculatory resistance. Circulation 110:2137–2142CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fearon WF, Low AF, Yong AS, McGeoch R, Berry C, Shah MG, Ho MY, Kim HS, Loh JP, Oldroyd KG (2013) Prognostic value of the index of microcirculatory resistance measured after primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Circulation 127:2436–2441CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Pijls NH, De Bruyne B, Peels K, Van Der Voort PH, Bonnier HJ, Bartunek JKJJ, Koolen JJ (1996) Measurement of fractional flow reserve to assess the functional severity of coronary-artery stenoses. N Engl J Med 334:1703–1708CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Fearon WF, Balsam LB, Farouque HM, Caffarelli AD, Robbins RC, Fitzgerald PJ, Yock PG, Yeung AC (2003) Novel index for invasively assessing the coronary microcirculation. Circulation 107:3129–3132CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    De Bruyne B, Pijls NH, Smith L, Wievegg M, Heyndrickx GR (2001) Coronary thermodilution to assess flow reserve: experimental validation. Circulation 104:2003–2006CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Murai T, Lee T, Kanaji Y, Matsuda J, Usui E, Araki M, Niida T, Hishikari K, Ichijyo S, Hamaya R, Yonetsu T, Isobe M, Kakuta T (2016) The influence of elective percutaneous coronary intervention on microvascular resistance: a serial assessment using the index of microcirculatory resistance. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol 311:H520–531CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Matsuda J, Murai T, Kanaji Y, Usui E, Araki M, Niida T, Ichijyo S, Hamaya R, Lee T, Yonetsu T, Isobe M, Kakuta T (2016) Prevalence and clinical significance of discordant changes in fractional and coronary flow reserve after elective percutaneous coronary intervention. J Am Heart Assoc 5:e004400CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    De Bruyne B, Fearon WF, Pijls NH, Barbato E, Tonino P, Piroth Z, Jagic N, Mobius-Winckler S, Rioufol G, Witt N, Kala P, MacCarthy P, Engstrom T, Oldroyd K, Mavromatis K, Manoharan G, Verlee P, Frobert O, Curzen N, Johnson JB, Limacher A, Nuesch E, Juni P, Investigators FT (2014) Fractional flow reserve-guided PCI for stable coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med 371:1208–1217CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gould KL, Johnson NP, Bateman TM, Beanlands RS, Bengel FM, Bober R, Camici PG, Cerqueira MD, Chow BJ, Di Carli MF, Dorbala S, Gewirtz H, Gropler RJ, Kaufmann PA, Knaapen P, Knuuti J, Merhige ME, Rentrop KP, Ruddy TD, Schelbert HR, Schindler TH, Schwaiger M, Sdringola S, Vitarello J, Williams KA Sr, Gordon D, Dilsizian V, Narula J (2013) Anatomic versus physiologic assessment of coronary artery disease. Role of coronary flow reserve, fractional flow reserve, and positron emission tomography imaging in revascularization decision-making. J Am Coll Cardiol 62:1639–1653CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wilson RF, Johnson MR, Marcus ML, Aylward PE, Skorton DJ, Collins S, White CW (1988) The effect of coronary angioplasty on coronary flow reserve. Circulation 77:873–885CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Siebes M, Verhoeff BJ, Meuwissen M, de Winter RJ, Spaan JA, Piek JJ (2004) Single-wire pressure and flow velocity measurement to quantify coronary stenosis hemodynamics and effects of percutaneous interventions. Circulation 109:756–762CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Albertal M, Regar E, Van Langenhove G, Carlier SG, Serrano P, Boersma E, Bruyne B, Di Mario C, Piek J, Serruys PW, Investigators D (2002) Flow velocity and predictors of a suboptimal coronary flow velocity reserve after coronary balloon angioplasty. Eur Heart J 23:133–138CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Johnson NP, Toth GG, Lai D, Zhu H, Acar G, Agostoni P, Appelman Y, Arslan F, Barbato E, Chen SL, Di Serafino L, Dominguez-Franco AJ, Dupouy P, Esen AM, Esen OB, Hamilos M, Iwasaki K, Jensen LO, Jimenez-Navarro MF, Katritsis DG, Kocaman SA, Koo BK, Lopez-Palop R, Lorin JD, Miller LH, Muller O, Nam CW, Oud N, Puymirat E, Rieber J, Rioufol G, Rodes-Cabau J, Sedlis SP, Takeishi Y, Tonino PA, Van Belle E, Verna E, Werner GS, Fearon WF, Pijls NH, De Bruyne B, Gould KL (2014) Prognostic value of fractional flow reserve: linking physiologic severity to clinical outcomes. J Am Coll Cardiol 64:1641–1654CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Japan KK, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Masahiro Hoshino
    • 1
  • Taishi Yonetsu
    • 1
  • Tadashi Murai
    • 1
  • Yoshihisa Kanaji
    • 1
  • Eisuke Usui
    • 1
  • Masahiro Hada
    • 1
  • Rikuta Hamaya
    • 1
  • Yoshinori Kanno
    • 1
  • Tetsumin Lee
    • 1
  • Tsunekazu Kakuta
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Cardiovascular MedicineTsuchiura Kyodo General HospitalTsuchiuraJapan

Personalised recommendations