Long‐Term Clinical Outcomes of Nonhyperemic Pressure Ratios: Resting Full‐Cycle Ratio, Diastolic Pressure Ratio, and Instantaneous Wave‐Free Ratio

Background Nonhyperemic pressure ratios (NHPRs) such as instantaneous wave‐free ratio, resting full‐cycle ratio, or diastolic pressure ratio have emerged as invasive physiologic indices precluding the need for hyperemic agents. The current study sought to evaluate the long‐term prognostic implications of NHPRs compared with fractional flow reserve (FFR). Methods and Results NHPRs were calculated from resting pressure tracings by an independent core laboratory in 1024 vessels (435 patients). The association between NHPRs and the risk of 5‐year vessel‐oriented composite outcomes (VOCO, a composite of cardiac death, vessel‐related myocardial infarction, and ischemia‐driven revascularization) were analyzed among 864 deferred vessels. Lesions with positive NHPRs (instantaneous wave free ratio, resting full‐cycle ratio, and diastolic pressure ratio ≤0.89) or FFR (≤0.80) showed significantly higher risk of VOCO at 5 years than those with negative NHPRs or FFR, respectively. Discriminant ability for 5‐year VOCO was not different among NHPRs and FFR (C‐index: 0.623–0.641, P for comparison=0.215). In comparison of VOCO among the groups with deferred concordant negative (NHPRs−/FFR−), deferred discordant (NHPRs+/FFR− or NHPRs−/FFR+), and revascularized vessels, the cumulative incidence of VOCO were 7.5%, 14.4%, and 14.8% (log‐rank P<0.001), respectively. The deferred discordant group showed similar risk of VOCO with the revascularized vessel group (hazard ratio, 0.981; 95% CI 0.434–2.217, P=0.964). Conclusions Currently available invasive pressure‐derived indices showed similar prognostic implications for vessel‐related events at 5 years. Deferred lesions with discordant results between NHPRs and FFR did not show higher risk of vessel‐related events at 5 years than revascularized vessels. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifiers: NCT01621438, NCT01621438.

[1]  Sean M. O'Brien,et al.  Initial Invasive or Conservative Strategy for Stable Coronary Disease. , 2020, The New England journal of medicine.

[2]  Hyo‐Soo Kim,et al.  Intravascular ultrasound or optical coherence tomography-defined anatomic severity and hemodynamic severity assessed by coronary physiologic indices. , 2019, Revista espanola de cardiologia.

[3]  K. Choi,et al.  Physiologic Characteristics and Clinical Outcomes of Patients With Discordance Between FFR and iFR. , 2019, JACC. Cardiovascular interventions.

[4]  K. Choi,et al.  Clinical Outcome of Lesions With Discordant Results Among Different Invasive Physiologic Indices - Resting Distal Coronary to Aortic Pressure Ratio, Resting Full-Cycle Ratio, Diastolic Pressure Ratio, Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio, and Fractional Flow Reserve. , 2019, Circulation journal : official journal of the Japanese Circulation Society.

[5]  G. Cheon,et al.  Diagnostic Performance of Nonhyperemic Pressure Ratios Assessed by 13N-Ammonium Positron Emission Tomography. , 2019, JACC. Cardiovascular interventions.

[6]  K. Choi,et al.  Physiological and Clinical Assessment of Resting Physiological Indexes: Resting Full-Cycle Ratio, Diastolic Pressure Ratio, and Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio , 2019, Circulation.

[7]  A. Jeremias,et al.  Validation of a novel non-hyperaemic index of coronary artery stenosis severity: the Resting Full-cycle Ratio (VALIDATE RFR) study. , 2018, EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology.

[8]  Volkmar Falk,et al.  2018 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization. , 2018, European heart journal.

[9]  B. Koo,et al.  Coronary Psychology: Do You Believe? , 2018, JACC. Cardiovascular interventions.

[10]  G. Rioufol,et al.  Five‐Year Outcomes with PCI Guided by Fractional Flow Reserve , 2018, The New England journal of medicine.

[11]  Jiyan Chen,et al.  Clinical implications of three-vessel fractional flow reserve measurement in patients with coronary artery disease , 2018, European heart journal.

[12]  G. Cheon,et al.  Exploring Coronary Circulatory Response to Stenosis and Its Association With Invasive Physiologic Indexes Using Absolute Myocardial Blood Flow and Coronary Pressure , 2017, Circulation.

[13]  K. Choi,et al.  Similarity and Difference of Resting Distal to Aortic Coronary Pressure and Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio. , 2017, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[14]  J. M. Lee,et al.  Clinical Outcomes According to Fractional Flow Reserve or Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio in Deferred Lesions. , 2017, JACC. Cardiovascular interventions.

[15]  G. Cheon,et al.  Diagnostic Performance of Resting and Hyperemic Invasive Physiological Indices to Define Myocardial Ischemia: Validation With 13N-Ammonia Positron Emission Tomography. , 2017, JACC. Cardiovascular interventions.

[16]  A. Jeremias,et al.  Use of the Instantaneous Wave‐free Ratio or Fractional Flow Reserve in PCI , 2017, The New England journal of medicine.

[17]  E. Omerovic,et al.  Instantaneous Wave‐free Ratio versus Fractional Flow Reserve to Guide PCI , 2017, The New England journal of medicine.

[18]  G. Cheon,et al.  Integrated Myocardial Perfusion Imaging Diagnostics Improve Detection of Functionally Significant Coronary Artery Stenosis by 13N-ammonia Positron Emission Tomography , 2016, Circulation. Cardiovascular imaging.

[19]  M. Meuwissen,et al.  Coronary pressure and flow relationships in humans: phasic analysis of normal and pathological vessels and the implications for stenosis assessment: a report from the Iberian–Dutch–English (IDEAL) collaborators , 2015, European heart journal.

[20]  Volker Klauss,et al.  Fractional flow reserve versus angiography for guidance of PCI in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (FAME): 5-year follow-up of a randomised controlled trial , 2015, The Lancet.

[21]  Nikola Jagic,et al.  Fractional flow reserve-guided PCI for stable coronary artery disease. , 2014, The New England journal of medicine.

[22]  P. Serruys,et al.  Quantification and impact of untreated coronary artery disease after percutaneous coronary intervention: the residual SYNTAX (Synergy Between PCI with Taxus and Cardiac Surgery) score. , 2012, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[23]  A. Hughes,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. , 2012, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[24]  Pamela S Douglas,et al.  Low diagnostic yield of elective coronary angiography. , 2010, The New England journal of medicine.

[25]  K. Berhane,et al.  Inference in Spline‐Based Models for Multiple Time‐to‐Event Data, with Applications to a Breast Cancer Prevention Trial , 2003, Biometrics.

[26]  Z. Ali,et al.  Comparison of Different Diastolic Resting Indexes to iFR Are They All Equal? , 2017 .

[27]  Helmut Baumgartner,et al.  ESC / EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization , 2014 .