CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Long-Term Follow-Up of Complete Versus Lesion-Only Revascularization in STEMI and Multivessel Disease: The CvLPRIT Trial Cardiac monocytes and macrophages after myocardial infarction Efficacy and safety of rosuvastatin vs. atorvastatin in lowering LDL cholesterol : A meta-analysis of trials with East Asian populations Successful catheter ablation of electrical storm after myocardial infarction Cardiac Shock Care Centers: JACC Review Topic of the Week Coronary Artery Calcium Is Associated with Left Ventricular Diastolic Function Independent of Myocardial Ischemia Left Ventricular Assist Devices for Lifelong Support Advances in Coronary No-Reflow Phenomenon-a Contemporary Review Optimal Stenting Technique for Complex Coronary Lesions Intracoronary Imaging-Guided Pre-Dilation, Stent Sizing, and Post-Dilation Natural History of Spontaneous Coronary Artery Dissection With Spontaneous Angiographic Healing

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.