Advertisement

Evaluation of the cut-off value for the instantaneous wave-free ratio of patients with aortic valve stenosis

  • Hiroyuki Arashi
  • Junichi YamaguchiEmail author
  • Tonre Ri
  • Kazuki Tanaka
  • Hisao Otsuki
  • Masashi Nakao
  • Kazuho Kamishima
  • Kentaro Jujo
  • Yuichiro Minami
  • Hiroshi Ogawa
  • Nobuhisa Hagiwara
Original Article
  • 75 Downloads

Abstract

The aim of this study was to examine the clinical value of iFR for AS patients. Functional evaluation of coronary stenosis in patients with aortic valve stenosis (AS) is challenging because the stress-induced test is often thought to be a contraindication. AS patients have a unique coronary flow pattern dependent on the diastolic phase. The instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) is a vasodilator-free, invasive pressure wire index of the functional severity of coronary stenosis and is calculated under resting conditions. And iFR calculated during a specific period of diastole may have the potential benefit to assess the functional severity of coronary stenosis in AS patients. We examined 158 consecutive patients (217 stenoses) whose iFR and fractional flow reserve (FFR) were measured simultaneously. Among the 158 patients, AS was observed in 13 (8.2%). The iFR showed good correlation with FFR in AS patients. The best cut-off value of iFR for the receiver-operator curve analysis to predict FFR of 0.8 was 0.9 for non-AS patients. However, it was 0.73 for AS patients. The present study demonstrated good correlation between iFR and FFR for AS patients. Vasodilator-free assessment using iFR may provide potential benefits when evaluating coronary stenosis in patients with AS. In AS patients, the best cut-off of iFR value predicting FFR value of 0.8 was lower than 0.9 that is the standard predictive value of iFR.

Keywords

Instantaneous wave-free ratio Aortic valve stenosis Fractional flow reserve Diastolic coronary flow 

Notes

Funding

This study was not financially supported by any company, grant, or fund.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Tonino PA, Fearon WF, De Bruyne B, Oldroyd KG, Leesar MA, Ver Lee PN, et al. Angiographic versus functional severity of coronary artery stenoses in the fame study fractional flow reserve versus angiography in multivessel evaluation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;55:2816–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Shaw LJ, Berman DS, Maron DJ, Mancini GB, Hayes SW, Hartigan PM, COURAGE Investigators, et al. Optimal medical therapy with or without percutaneous coronary intervention to reduce ischemic burden: results from the clinical outcomes utilizing revascularization and aggressive drug evaluation (COURAGE) trial nuclear substudy. Circulation. 2008;117:1283–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sen S, Escaned J, Malik IS, Mikhail GW, Foale RA, Mila R, et al. Development and validation of a new adenosine-independent index of stenosis severity from coronary wave-intensity analysis: results of the ADVISE (adenosine vasodilator independent stenosis evaluation) study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;59:1392–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Petraco R, Escaned J, Sen S, Nijjer S, Asrress KN, Echavarria-Pinto M, et al. Classification performance of instantaneous wave-free ratio (ifr) and fractional flow reserve in a clinical population of intermediate coronary stenoses: results of the ADVISE registry. EuroIntervention. 2013;9:91–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Petraco R, Park JJ, Sen S, Nijjer SS, Malik IS, Echavarria-Pinto M, et al. Hybrid iFR-FFR decision-making strategy: implications for enhancing universal adoption of physiology-guided coronary revascularisation. EuroIntervention. 2013;8:1157–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sen S, Asrress KN, Nijjer S, Petraco R, Malik IS, Foale RA, et al. Diagnostic classification of the instantaneous wave-free ratio is equivalent to fractional flow reserve and is not improved with adenosine administration. Results of clarify (classification accuracy of pressure-only ratios against indices using flow study). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;61:1409–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Petraco R, Al-Lamee R, Gotberg M, Sharp A, Hellig F, Nijjer SS, et al. Real-time use of instantaneous wave-free ratio: results of the ADVISE in-practice: an international, multicenter evaluation of instantaneous wave-free ratio in clinical practice. Am Heart J. 2014;168:739–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Harle T, Bojara W, Meyer S, Elsasser A. Comparison of instantaneous wave-free ratio (ifr) and fractional flow reserve (ffr)–first real world experience. Int J Cardiol. 2015;199:1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Petraco R, van de Hoef TP, Nijjer S, Sen S, van Lavieren MA, Foale RA, et al. Baseline instantaneous wave-free ratio as a pressure-only estimation of underlying coronary flow reserve: results of the justify-cfr study (joined coronary pressure and flow analysis to determine diagnostic characteristics of basal and hyperemic indices of functional lesion severity-coronary flow reserve). Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2014;7:492–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gilard M, Eltchaninoff H, Iung B, Donzeau-Gouge P, Chevreul K, Fajadet J, FRANCE 2 Investigators, et al. Registry of transcatheter aortic-valve implantation in high-risk patients. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:1705–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wenaweser P, Pilgrim T, Guerios E, Stortecky S, Huber C, Khattab AA, et al. Impact of coronary artery disease and percutaneous coronary intervention on outcomes in patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation. EuroIntervention. 2011;7:541–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gautier M, Pepin M, Himbert D, Ducrocq G, Iung B, Dilly MP, et al. Impact of coronary artery disease on indications for transcatheter aortic valve implantation and on procedural outcomes. EuroIntervention. 2011;7:549–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Di Gioia G, Pellicano M, Toth GG, Casselman F, Adjedj J, Van Praet F, et al. Fractional flow reserve-guided revascularization in patients with aortic stenosis. Am J Cardiol. 2016;117:1511–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Garcia D, Camici PG, Durand LG, Rajappan K, Gaillard E, Rimoldi OE, et al. Impairment of coronary flow reserve in aortic stenosis. J Appl Physiol. 1985;2009(106):113–21.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hongo M, Goto T, Watanabe N, Nakatsuka T, Tanaka M, Kinoshita O, et al. Relation of phasic coronary flow velocity profile to clinical and hemodynamic characteristics of patients with aortic valve disease. Circulation. 1993;88:953–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lang RM, Bierig M, Devereux RB, Flachskampf FA, Foster E, Pellikka PA, et al. Recommendations for chamber quantification: a report from the American Society of Echocardiography’s guidelines and standards committee and the chamber quantification writing group, developed in conjunction with the European Association of Echocardiography, a branch of the European Society of Cardiology. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2005;18:1440–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Skalidis EI, Kochiadakis GE, Koukouraki SI, Parthenakis FI, Karkavitsas NS, Vardas PE. Phasic coronary flow pattern and flow reserve in patients with left bundle branch block and normal coronary arteries. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1999;33:1338–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kenny A, Wisbey CR, Shapiro LM. Profiles of coronary blood flow velocity in patients with aortic stenosis and the effect of valve replacement: a transthoracic echocardiographic study. Br Heart J. 1994;71:57–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Marcus ML, Doty DB, Hiratzka LF, Wright CB, Eastham CL. Decreased coronary reserve: a mechanism for angina pectoris in patients with aortic stenosis and normal coronary arteries. N Engl J Med. 1982;307:1362–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hildick-Smith DJ, Shapiro LM. Coronary flow reserve improves after aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis: an adenosine transthoracic echocardiography study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2000;36:1889–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Japanese Association of Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hiroyuki Arashi
    • 1
  • Junichi Yamaguchi
    • 1
    Email author
  • Tonre Ri
    • 1
  • Kazuki Tanaka
    • 1
  • Hisao Otsuki
    • 1
  • Masashi Nakao
    • 1
  • Kazuho Kamishima
    • 2
  • Kentaro Jujo
    • 1
  • Yuichiro Minami
    • 1
  • Hiroshi Ogawa
    • 1
  • Nobuhisa Hagiwara
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Cardiology, The Heart Institute of JapanTokyo Women’s Medical UniversityTokyoJapan
  2. 2.Department of CardiologyRissho Kosei-kai Kosei General HospitalTokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations