Coronary physiology in patients with severe aortic stenosis: Comparison between fractional flow reserve and

Roberto Scarsini1, Gabriele Pesarini1, Carlo Zivelonghi1

  • 1Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, University of Verona, Italy.

Insights

The conventional instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) threshold has lower diagnostic accuracy for coronary artery disease in severe aortic stenosis patients. A lower iFR cut-off is needed for accurate assessment in this population.

Area of Science:

  • Cardiology
  • Interventional Cardiology
  • Diagnostic Imaging

Background:

  • Functional assessment of coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) lacks validation.
  • Optimal physiological investigation strategies for coronary stenosis in AS patients remain undetermined.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To compare the diagnostic performance of instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) and fractional flow reserve (FFR) in patients with severe AS.
  • To evaluate the agreement between iFR and FFR in assessing coronary lesions in AS patients.

Main Methods:

  • Investigated 179 coronary lesions in 85 AS patients using on-line iFR and FFR.
  • Compared diagnostic performance with a control group of 167 patients (290 lesions) with stable CAD without AS.
  • Tested iFR-FFR agreement using the conventional 0.80 FFR cut-off.

Main Results:

  • iFR and FFR correlation was similar between AS and CAD groups (AUC 0.97 vs 0.96).
  • Conventional iFR cut-off (0.89) showed significantly lower diagnostic accuracy in AS patients (76.3%) compared to CAD patients (86.1%).
  • An optimized iFR cut-off of 0.83 for AS patients significantly improved accuracy (91.3%) and maintained high negative predictive value (95.5%).

Conclusions:

  • The conventional iFR cut-off has reduced diagnostic agreement with FFR in severe AS patients.
  • Severe AS influences iFR ischemic thresholds, necessitating further comparative studies to establish optimal cut-offs.
Abstract

Related Concept Videos