Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Clinical Value of Single-Projection Angiography-Derived FFR in Noninfarct-Related Artery

  • Woochan Kwon
  • , Ki Hong Choi
  • , Seung Hun Lee
  • , David Hong
  • , Doosup Shin
  • , Hyun Kuk Kim
  • , Keun Ho Park
  • , Eun Ho Choo
  • , Chan Joon Kim
  • , Min Chul Kim
  • , Young Joon Hong
  • , Sung Gyun Ahn
  • , Joon Hyung Doh
  • , Sang Yeub Lee
  • , Sang Don Park
  • , Hyun Jong Lee
  • , Min Gyu Kang
  • , Jin Sin Koh
  • , Yun Kyeong Cho
  • , Chang Wook Nam
  • Hyun Sung Joh, Taek Kyu Park, Jeong Hoon Yang, Young Bin Song, Seung Hyuk Choi, Myung Ho Jeong, Hyeon Cheol Gwon, Joo Yong Hahn, Joo Myung Lee
  • Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan university
  • Chonnam National University
  • Duke University
  • Chosun University
  • Yonsei University Mirae Campus
  • Inje University
  • Chung-Ang University
  • Inha University
  • Sejong Hospital
  • Gyeongsang National University
  • Keimyung University
  • Seoul National University Boramae Hospital

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

7 Scopus citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The Murray law-based quantitative flow ratio (μFR) is an emerging technique that requires only 1 projection of coronary angiography with similar accuracy to quantitative flow ratio (QFR). However, it has not been validated for the evaluation of noninfarct-related artery (non-IRA) in acute myocardial infarction (AMI) settings. Therefore, our study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of μFR and the safety of deferring non-IRA lesions with μFR >0.80 in the setting of AMI. METHODS: μFR and QFR were analyzed for non-IRA lesions of patients with AMI enrolled in the FRAME-AMI trial (Fractional Flow Reserve Versus Angiography-Guided Strategy for Management of Non-Infarction Related Artery Stenosis in Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction), consisting of fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guided percutaneous coronary intervention and angiography-guided percutaneous coronary intervention groups. The diagnostic accuracy of μFR was compared with QFR and FFR. Patients were classified by the non-IRA μFR value of 0.80 as a cutoff value. The primary outcome was a vessel-oriented composite outcome, a composite of cardiac death, non-IRA-related myocardial infarction, and non-IRA-related repeat revascularization. RESULTS: μFR and QFR analyses were feasible in 443 patients (552 lesions). μFR showed acceptable correlation with FFR (R=0.777; P<0.001), comparable C-index with QFR to predict FFR ≤0.80 (μFR versus QFR: 0.926 versus 0.961, P=0.070), and shorter total analysis time (mean, 32.7 versus 186.9 s; P<0.001). Non-IRA with μFR >0.80 and deferred percutaneous coronary intervention had a significantly lower risk of vessel-oriented composite outcome than non-IRA with performed percutaneous coronary intervention (3.4% versus 10.5%; hazard ratio, 0.37 [95% CI, 0.14-0.99]; P=0.048). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with multivessel AMI, μFR of non-IRA showed acceptable diagnostic accuracy comparable to that of QFR to predict FFR ≤0.80. Deferred non-IRA with μFR >0.80 showed a lower risk of vessel-oriented composite outcome than revascularized non-IRA. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02715518.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)E013844
JournalCirculation: Cardiovascular Interventions
Volume17
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - 1 May 2024

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2024 Lippincott Williams and Wilkins. All rights reserved.

Keywords

  • coronary angiography
  • fractional flow reserve, myocardial
  • myocardial infarction
  • percutaneous coronary intervention

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Clinical Value of Single-Projection Angiography-Derived FFR in Noninfarct-Related Artery'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this