New set of intravascular ultrasound-derived anatomic criteria for defining functionally significant stenoses in small coronary arteries (results from Intravascular Ultrasound Diagnostic Evaluation of Atherosclerosis in Singapore [IDEAS] study).

We sought to determine the intravascular ultrasound-derived anatomic criteria for functionally significant lesions in small coronary arteries with a reference segment diameter <3 mm. A fractional flow reserve (FFR) of <0.75, as determined by pressure wire using high-dose (100 to 150 microg) intracoronary adenosine, was used as the reference standard for functional significance. For the 94 patients/lesions involved in the present study, the average reference vessel diameter was 2.72 mm. The FFR was <0.75 in 38 patients (40.4%) and > or =0.75 in 56 patients (59.6%). Logistic regression analysis identified the minimal lumen area, plaque burden, and lesion length as the 3 most important determinants of the FFR. Using classification and regression tree analysis, the best cutoff values for these determinants to discriminate a FFR of <0.75 versus > or =0.75 were a minimal lumen area of < or =2.0 mm(2) (sensitivity 82.35%, specificity 80.77%), plaque burden of > or =80% (sensitivity 87.9%, specificity 78.9%), and lesion length of > or =20 mm (sensitivity 63.6%, specificity 78.9%). A significant increase was found in the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of the combined parameters (minimal lumen area plus plaque burden plus lesion length) compared to the plaque burden (p = 0.014) and other individual parameters (p <0.001). In conclusion, we found that intravascular ultrasound-derived anatomic criteria are able to predict the functional significance of intermediate lesions in small coronary arteries. A minimal lumen area of < or =2.0 mm(2), plaque burden of > or =80%, and lesion length of > or =20 mm predicted a FFR of <0.75 with good sensitivity and specificity.

[1]  M. Leon,et al.  Clinical, intravascular ultrasound, and quantitative angiographic determinants of the coronary flow reserve before and after percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. , 1998, The American journal of cardiology.

[2]  P. Yock,et al.  Intravascular ultrasound: novel pathophysiological insights and current clinical applications. , 2001, Circulation.

[3]  G. Finet,et al.  150 microgram intracoronary adenosine bolus for accurate fractional flow reserve assessment of angiographically intermediate coronary stenosis. , 2005, EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology.

[4]  K Suzuki,et al.  Clinical potential of intravascular ultrasound for physiological assessment of coronary stenosis: relationship between quantitative ultrasound tomography and pressure-derived fractional flow reserve. , 1999, Circulation.

[5]  D. Berman,et al.  Clinical validation of intravascular ultrasound imaging for assessment of coronary stenosis severity: comparison with stress myocardial perfusion imaging. , 1999, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[6]  William Wijns,et al.  Percutaneous coronary intervention of functionally nonsignificant stenosis: 5-year follow-up of the DEFER Study. , 2007, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[7]  J. Tobis,et al.  Assessment of intermediate severity coronary lesions in the catheterization laboratory. , 2007, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[8]  M. Leon,et al.  Impact of preintervention intravascular ultrasound imaging on transcatheter treatment strategies in coronary artery disease. , 1994, The American journal of cardiology.

[9]  U. Siebert,et al.  Fractional flow reserve versus angiography for guiding percutaneous coronary intervention. , 2009, The New England journal of medicine.

[10]  E. Tuzcu,et al.  Intravascular ultrasound in the current percutaneous coronary intervention era. , 2006, Cardiology clinics.

[11]  C. Di Mario,et al.  Intravascular ultrasound criteria for the assessment of the functional significance of intermediate coronary artery stenoses and comparison with fractional flow reserve. , 2001, The American journal of cardiology.

[12]  U. Siebert,et al.  Coronary Pressure Measurement After Stenting Predicts Adverse Events at Follow-Up: A Multicenter Registry , 2002, Circulation.

[13]  Huai Luo,et al.  Effect of intracoronary ultrasound imaging on clinical decision making. , 1995, American heart journal.

[14]  G. Lip,et al.  Do Indo-Asians have smaller coronary arteries? , 1999, Postgraduate medical journal.

[15]  Grace A Lin,et al.  Frequency of stress testing to document ischemia prior to elective percutaneous coronary intervention. , 2008, JAMA.

[16]  P. H. van der Voort,et al.  Measurement of fractional flow reserve to assess the functional severity of coronary-artery stenoses. , 1996, The New England journal of medicine.

[17]  P. H. van der Voort,et al.  Fractional flow reserve. A useful index to evaluate the influence of an epicardial coronary stenosis on myocardial blood flow. , 1995, Circulation.

[18]  Patrick W Serruys,et al.  Comprehensive assessment of coronary artery stenoses: computed tomography coronary angiography versus conventional coronary angiography and correlation with fractional flow reserve in patients with stable angina. , 2008, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[19]  J. E. Sousa,et al.  Anatomical and physiologic assessments in patients with small coronary artery disease: final results of the Physiologic and Anatomical Evaluation Prior to and After Stent Implantation in Small Coronary Vessels (PHANTOM) trial. , 2007, American heart journal.

[20]  C. Bray,et al.  Are Asian coronary arteries smaller than Caucasian? A study on angiographic coronary artery size estimation during life. , 1995, International journal of cardiology.