The effect of hydrostatic pressure on invasive coronary pressure measurements: Comparison with [

coronary artery disease fractional flow reserve imaging positron emission tomography percutaneous coronary intervention positron emission tomography

Journal

Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions
ISSN: 1522-726X
Titre abrégé: Catheter Cardiovasc Interv
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 100884139

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
11 Sep 2024
Historique:
revised: 08 08 2024
received: 12 07 2024
accepted: 22 08 2024
medline: 11 9 2024
pubmed: 11 9 2024
entrez: 11 9 2024
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

Fractional flow reserve (FFR) has emerged as the invasive gold standard for assessing vessel-specific ischemia. However, FFR measurements are influenced by the hydrostatic effect, which might adversely impact the assessment of ischemia. This study aimed to investigate the impact of hydrostatic pressure on FFR measurements by correcting for the height and comparing FFR with [ The 206 patients were included in this analysis. Patients underwent coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA), [ The study found a reclassification in 7% of the coronary arteries. Notably, 11% of left anterior descending (LAD) arteries were reclassified from hemodynamically significant to nonsignificant. Conversely, 6% of left circumflex (Cx) arteries were reclassified from nonsignificant to significant. After correcting for the hydrostatic pressure effect, the correlation between FFR and PET-derived RFR increased significantly from r = 0.720 to r = 0.786 (p = 0.009). The average magnitude of correction was +0.05 FFR units in the LAD, -0.03 in the Cx, and -0.02 in the right coronary artery. Hydrostatic pressure has a small but clinically relevant influence on FFR measurements obtained with a pressure wire. Correcting for this hydrostatic error significantly enhances the correlation between FFR and PET-derived RFR.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Fractional flow reserve (FFR) has emerged as the invasive gold standard for assessing vessel-specific ischemia. However, FFR measurements are influenced by the hydrostatic effect, which might adversely impact the assessment of ischemia.
AIMS OBJECTIVE
This study aimed to investigate the impact of hydrostatic pressure on FFR measurements by correcting for the height and comparing FFR with [
METHODS METHODS
The 206 patients were included in this analysis. Patients underwent coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA), [
RESULTS RESULTS
The study found a reclassification in 7% of the coronary arteries. Notably, 11% of left anterior descending (LAD) arteries were reclassified from hemodynamically significant to nonsignificant. Conversely, 6% of left circumflex (Cx) arteries were reclassified from nonsignificant to significant. After correcting for the hydrostatic pressure effect, the correlation between FFR and PET-derived RFR increased significantly from r = 0.720 to r = 0.786 (p = 0.009). The average magnitude of correction was +0.05 FFR units in the LAD, -0.03 in the Cx, and -0.02 in the right coronary artery.
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
Hydrostatic pressure has a small but clinically relevant influence on FFR measurements obtained with a pressure wire. Correcting for this hydrostatic error significantly enhances the correlation between FFR and PET-derived RFR.

Identifiants

pubmed: 39258435
doi: 10.1002/ccd.31215
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Informations de copyright

© 2024 Wiley Periodicals LLC.

Références

Neumann F‐J, Sousa‐Uva M, Ahlsson A, et al. 2018 ESC/EACTS guidelines on myocardial revascularization. Eur Heart J. 2019;40(2):87‐165.
De Bruyne B, Baudhuin T, Melin JA, et al. Coronary flow reserve calculated from pressure measurements in humans. Validation with positron emission tomography. Circulation. 1994;89(3):1013‐1022.
Pijls NHJ, De Bruyne B, Peels K, et al. Measurement of fractional flow reserve to assess the functional severity of coronary‐artery stenoses. N Engl J Med. 1996;334(26):1703‐1708.
Bech GJW, De Bruyne B, Pijls NHJ, et al. Fractional flow reserve to determine the appropriateness of angioplasty in moderate coronary stenosis. Circulation. 2001;103(24):2928‐2934.
Tonino PAL, De Bruyne B, Pijls NHJ, et al. Fractional flow reserve versus angiography for guiding percutaneous coronary intervention. N Engl J Med. 2009;360(3):213‐224.
De Bruyne B, Pijls NHJ, Kalesan B, et al. Fractional flow reserve–guided PCI versus medical therapy in stable coronary disease. N Engl J Med. 2012;367(11):991‐1001.
Lawton JS, Tamis‐Holland JE, Bangalore S, et al. 2021 ACC/AHA/SCAI guideline for coronary artery revascularization. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2022;79(2):e21‐e129.
Pijls NH, van Son JA, Kirkeeide RL, De Bruyne B, Gould KL. Experimental basis of determining maximum coronary, myocardial, and collateral blood flow by pressure measurements for assessing functional stenosis severity before and after percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. Circulation. 1993;87(4):1354‐1367.
Stuijfzand WJ, Uusitalo V, Kero T, et al. Relative flow reserve derived from quantitative perfusion imaging May not outperform stress myocardial blood flow for identification of hemodynamically significant coronary artery disease. Circ Cardiovasc Imag. 2015;8(1):e002400.
Härle T, Luz M, Meyer S, et al. Effect of coronary anatomy and hydrostatic pressure on intracoronary indices of stenosis severity. JACC Cardiovasc Interven. 2017;10(8):764‐773.
Härle T, Meyer S, Bojara W, Vahldiek F, Elsässer A. Intracoronary pressure measurement differences between anterior and posterior coronary territories. Herz. 2017;42(4):395‐402.
Härle T, Luz M, Meyer S, et al. Influence of hydrostatic pressure on intracoronary indices of stenosis severity in vivo. Clin Res Cardiol. 2018;107(3):222‐232.
Üveges Á, Tar B, Jenei C, et al. The impact of hydrostatic pressure on the result of physiological measurements in various coronary segments. Int J Cardiovasc Imag. 2021;37(1):5‐14.
Nagamatsu S, Sakamoto K, Yamashita T, et al. Impact of hydrostatic pressure on fractional flow reserve: in vivo experimental study of anatomical height difference of coronary arteries. J Cardiol. 2020;76(1):73‐79.
Danad I, Raijmakers PG, Driessen RS, et al. Comparison of coronary CT angiography, SPECT, PET, and hybrid imaging for diagnosis of ischemic heart disease determined by fractional flow reserve. JAMA Cardiology. 2017;2(10):1100.
De Waard GA, Danad I, Petraco R, et al. Fractional flow reserve, instantaneous wave‐free ratio, and resting Pd/Pa compared with [15O]H2O positron emission tomography myocardial perfusion imaging: a PACIFIC trial sub‐study. Eur Heart J. 2018;39(46):4072‐4081.
Hinghofer‐Szalkay H, Greenleaf JE. Continuous monitoring of blood volume changes in humans. J Appl Physiol. 1987;63(3):1003‐1007.
Danad I, Uusitalo V, Kero T, et al. Quantitative assessment of myocardial perfusion in the detection of significant coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;64(14):1464‐1475.
Kawaguchi Y, Ito K, Kin H, et al. Impact of hydrostatic pressure variations caused by height differences in supine and prone positions on fractional flow reserve values in the coronary circulation. J Interv Cardiol. 2019;2019:4532862.
Tamaru H, Fujii K, Fukunaga M, et al. Mechanisms of gradual pressure drop in angiographically normal left anterior descending and right coronary artery: insights from wave intensity analysis. J Cardiol. 2021;78(1):72‐78.
Sakai K, Mizukami T, Leipsic J, et al. Coronary atherosclerosis phenotypes in focal and diffuse disease. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2023;16(11):1452‐1464.
Collet C, Johnson NP, Mizukami T, et al. Impact of Post‐PCI FFR stratified by coronary artery. JACC Cardiovasc Interven. 2023;16(19):2396‐2408.

Auteurs

Adriaan Wilgenhof (A)

Cardiovascular Center Aalst, OLV-Clinic, Aalst, Belgium.
Department of Cardiology, Amsterdam Cardiovascular Sciences Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Department of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy.

Ruurt A Jukema (RA)

Department of Cardiology, Amsterdam Cardiovascular Sciences Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Roel S Driessen (RS)

Department of Cardiology, Amsterdam Cardiovascular Sciences Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Ibrahim Danad (I)

Department of Cardiology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

Pieter G Raijmakers (PG)

Department of Cardiology, Amsterdam Cardiovascular Sciences Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Radiology, Nuclear Medicine & PET Research, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Niels van Royen (N)

Department of Cardiology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

Lokien X van Nunen (LX)

Department of Cardiology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

Carlos Collet (C)

Cardiovascular Center Aalst, OLV-Clinic, Aalst, Belgium.

Guus A de Waard (GA)

Department of Cardiology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

Paul Knaapen (P)

Department of Cardiology, Amsterdam Cardiovascular Sciences Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Classifications MeSH