Clinical effects of physiologic lesion testing in influencing treatment strategy for multi-vessel coronary artery disease

Authors

Harsh Rawal, University of Connecticut, St Francis Hospital, Hartford, CT, United States of America.
Tung D. Nguyen, Department of Physiology & Biophysics, University of Illinois at Chicago - College of Medicine, Chicago, IL, United States of America.
Efehi Igbinomwanhia, Advocate Health - Midwest
Lloyd W. Klein, Department of Cardiology, University of California - San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, United States of America.

Recommended Citation

Rawal H, Nguyen TD, Igbinomwanhia E, Klein LW. Clinical effects of physiologic lesion testing in influencing treatment strategy for multi-vessel coronary artery disease. Am Heart J Plus. 2024;40:100378. Published 2024 Feb 29. doi:10.1016/j.ahjo.2024.100378

Affiliations

Advocate Illinois Masonic Medical Center

Abstract

Background:The application of fractional flow reserve (FFR) and instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) in multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD) patients has not been definitively explored. We herein assessed how treatment strategies were decided based on FFR/iFR values in vessels selected clinically. Specifically, we sought to determine whether treatment selection was based on whether the vessel tested was the clinical target stenosis.

Methods:270 consecutive patients with angiographically determined multivessel disease who underwent FFR/iFR testing were included. Patients were classified initially based on their angiographic findings, then re-evaluated from FFR/iFR results (normal or abnormal). Tested lesions were classified into target or non-target lesions based on clinical and non-invasive evaluations.

Results:Abnormal FFR/iFR values were demonstrated in 51.9 % of patients, in whom 51.4 % received coronary stenting (PCI) and 44.3 % had bypass surgery (CABG). With two-vessel CAD patients, medical therapy was preferred when the target lesion was normal (72.6 %), while PCI was preferred when it was abnormal (78.4 %). In non-target lesions, PCI was preferred regardless of FFR/iFR results (78.0 %). With three-vessel CAD patients, CABG was preferred when the target lesion was abnormal (68.5 %), and there was no difference in the selected modality when it was normal. Furthermore, the incidence of tested lesions was higher in the left anterior descending (LAD) compared to other coronary arteries, and two-vessel CAD patients with LAD stenoses were more frequently treated by PCI.

Conclusion:The use of invasive physiologic testing in multivessel CAD patients may alter the preferred treatment strategy, leading to an overall increase in PCI selection.

Document Type

Article

PubMed ID

38510505