CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Fractional Flow Reserve

Abstract

Recommended Article

Long-term Variations of FFR and iFR After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Five-Year Outcomes with PCI Guided by Fractional Flow Reserve Fractional flow reserve derived from computed tomography coronary angiography in the assessment and management of stable chest pain: the FORECAST randomized trial Comparison of Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography, Fractional Flow Reserve, and Perfusion Imaging for Ischemia Diagnosis Blinded Physiological Assessment of Residual Ischemia After Successful Angiographic Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: The DEFINE PCI Study 5-Year Outcomes of PCI Guided by Measurement of Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio Versus Fractional Flow Reserve Diagnostic performance of transluminal attenuation gradient and fractional flow reserve by coronary computed tomographic angiography (FFR(CT)) compared to invasive FFR: a sub-group analysis from the DISCOVER-FLOW and DeFACTO studies Prognostic Implication of Functional Incomplete Revascularization and Residual Functional SYNTAX Score in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease

Original Research2020 Jun 3;S0167-5273(20)31098-6.

JOURNAL:Int J Cardiol. Article Link

Long-term Variations of FFR and iFR After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation

R Scarsini, M Lunardi, F Ribichini et al. Keywords: FFR; iFR; severe AS; post TAVI

ABSTRACT

Long-term variations of fractional flow reserve (FFR) and instantaneous wave-free-ratio (iFR) after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) have not been previously assessed. A total of 23 coronary lesions in 14 patients with aortic stenosis (AS) underwent physiology assessment at baseline, immediately after TAVI and at 14(7-29) months of follow-up. The angiographic severity of the lesions did not progress at follow-up (54[45-64] vs 54[49-63], p = .53). Overall, FFR (0.87[0.85-0.92] vs 0.88[0.82-0.92], p = .45) and iFR (0.88[0.85-0.96] vs 0.91[0.86-0.97], p = .30) did not change significantly compared with the baseline. FFR decreased in 3(13%) lesions with abnormal baseline value, whereas it remained stable in lesions with FFR > 0.80. Conversely, iFR did not show a systematic trend at long-term after TAVI. However, iFR demonstrated a higher reclassification rate at follow-up compared with FFR (p = .02). In conclusions, in this exploratory study, only minor variations of coronary physiology indices were observed at long-term after TAVI. Nevertheless, caution should be exercised in the interpretation of borderline FFR and iFR values in severe AS.