CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Stroke Rates Following Surgical Versus Percutaneous Coronary Revascularization Ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes Single Versus Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Following TAVR: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Expansion or contraction of stenting in coronary artery disease? Impact of bifurcation technique on 2-year clinical outcomes in 773 patients with distal unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis treated with drug-eluting stents Surgical ineligibility and mortality among patients with unprotected left main or multivessel coronary artery disease undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention 1-Year Outcomes of Delayed Versus Immediate Intervention in Patients With Transient ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Assessment and Quantitation of Stent Results by Intracoronary Optical Coherence Tomography Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Using Drug-Eluting Stents Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting for Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Stenosis: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials EXCELling in Left Main Intervention

Review ArticleVolume 13, Issue 14, July 2020

JOURNAL:JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions Article Link

The Impact of Coronary Physiology on Contemporary Clinical Decision Making

N Kogame, M Ono, PW Serruys et al. Keywords: angiography-derived FFR; computed tomography–derived fractional flow reserve; coronary microvascular disease; FFR ;instantaneous wave-free ratio; nonhyperemic pressure ratio

ABSTRACT

Physiological assessment of coronary artery disease (CAD) has become one of the cornerstones of decision making for myocardial revascularization, with a large body of evidence supporting the benefits of using fractional flow reserve and other pressure-based indexes for functional assessment of coronary stenoses. Furthermore, physiology allows the identification of specific vascular dysfunction mechanisms in patients without obstructive CAD. Currently, more than 10 modalities of functional coronary assessment are available, although the overall adoption of these physiological tools, of either intracoronary or image-based nature, is still low. In this paper the authors review these modalities of functional coronary assessment according to their timing of use: outside the catheterization laboratory, in the catheterization laboratory prior to the percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), and in the catheterization laboratory during or after PCI. The authors discuss how the information obtained can be used in setting the indication for PCI, in planning and guiding the procedure, and in documenting the final functional result of the intervention. The advantages and limitations of each modality in each setting are discussed. Furthermore, the key value of intracoronary physiology in diagnosing mechanisms of microcirculatory dysfunction, which account for the presence of ischemia in many patients without obstructive CAD, is revisited. On the basis of the opportunities generated by the multiplicity of diagnostic tools described, the authors propose an algorithmic approach to physiological coronary investigations in clinical practice, with the key aims of: 1) avoiding unneeded revascularization procedures; 2) improving procedural PCI and long-term outcomes in patients with obstructive CAD; and 3) diagnosing vascular dysfunction mechanisms that can be effectively treated in patients with NOCAD. The authors believe that such structured approach may also contribute to the wider adoption of available technologies for functional assessment of patients with CAD.