Loading…

Agreement between iFR and other non-hyperaemic pressure ratios in severe aortic stenosis

Instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) can reliably assess the physiological significance of coronary artery disease (CAD). Previous studies have demonstrated its interchangeability with other non-hyperaemic pressure ratios (NHPR), but there is no data exploring whether this association is maintained i...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Cardiovascular revascularization medicine 2022-08, Vol.41, p.47-52
Main Authors: Comella, Andrea, Chan, Jasmine, Thakkar, Harsh V., Kim, Jiwon, Michail, Michael, Nicholls, Stephen J., Gooley, Robert, Ko, Brian, Cameron, James D., Brown, Adam J.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) can reliably assess the physiological significance of coronary artery disease (CAD). Previous studies have demonstrated its interchangeability with other non-hyperaemic pressure ratios (NHPR), but there is no data exploring whether this association is maintained in patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS). Forty-two patients (67 lesions) with severe AS were recruited and underwent invasive pressure-wire assessment. Data were extracted to calculate iFR, resting Pd/Pa, diastolic pressure ratios (DPR and dPR), and Diastolic Hyperaemia-Free Ratio (DFR). iFR was then compared with other NHPR to determine agreement and accuracy. Mean aortic gradient and dimensionless index were 44.3 ± 11.6 mmHg and 0.23 ± 0.04, respectively. Of the 67 vessels, 57% were LAD, 15% LCx, 13% RCA and 12% other. There was strong positive correlation between iFR and all other NHPR, including Pd/Pa (r = 0.91, p < 0.001), DPR (r = 0.99, p < 0.001), dPR (r = 0.97, p < 0.001) and DFR (r = 0.98, p < 0.001). While Bald-Altman analysis demonstrated that Pd/Pa and DFR were numerically different from iFR, ROC analyses demonstrated iFR ≤0.89 was accurately identified by all NHPRs; Pd/Pa (AUC = 0.965, 95% CI [0.928–0.994]), DPR (AUC = 1.000, 95% CI [1.000–1.000]), dPR (AUC = 0.974, 95% CI [0.937–1.000]), DFR (AUC = 0.989, 95% CI [0.968–1.000]). In patients with severe AS, all the included NHPR in this analysis accurately predicted iFR < 0.89. These data should reassure clinicians that use of alternative NHPR to iFR is reasonable when assessing the physiological significance of CAD in patients with severe AS. •All NHPRs show great correlation with iFR in patients with severe AS.•Pd/Pa and DFR appear to be numerically different from iFR.•All NHPRs have the same clinical relevance and are able to accurately predict an iFR ≤ 0.89.
ISSN:1553-8389
1878-0938
DOI:10.1016/j.carrev.2022.01.011