» Articles » PMID: 15110200

Effect of Acute Myocardial Infarction on the Utility of Fractional Flow Reserve for the Physiologic Assessment of the Severity of Coronary Artery Narrowing

Overview
Journal Am J Cardiol
Date 2004 Apr 28
PMID 15110200
Citations 5
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Fractional flow reserve (FFR) has been shown to be a useful physiologic index of coronary lesion severity in myocardial beds of patients without prior infarction and in those with remote infarction. Acute myocardial infarction (AMI) causes myocardial necrosis and microvascular stunning, embolization, and damage. Whether FFR remains a useful index of epicardial flow in the setting of recent myocardial infarction is not established. Cardiac risk factors, serum troponin I, angiographic minimal lumen diameter (MLD), percent diameter stenosis (DS), lesion length, vessel reference diameter, hyperemic central aortic pressure, hyperemic pressure distal to stenosis, and FFR were compared in 43 vessels subtending recent AMI beds to 25 control vessels, matched by lesion length and MLD, in patients without AMI. There were no differences in DS, MLD, lesion length, or reference diameter between AMI and non-AMI groups. Patients with AMI had mean troponin I levels of 91.8 +/- 162 ng/ml. Left ventricular ejection fraction was significantly lower in patients with than without AMI (55 +/- 9% vs 62 +/- 8%, p <0.05). There were no significant differences in hyperemic central aortic pressure (92 +/- 13 vs 99 +/- 15 mm Hg, p = NS), hyperemic pressure distal to the stenosis (62 +/- 17 vs 66 +/- 19 mm Hg, p = NS), or FFR (0.67 +/- 17 vs 0.68 +/- 17, p = NS) between recent AMI and non-AMI control patients. There was a significant correlation between DS and FFR for both patients with (p <0.001) and without (p = 0.003) infarctions. Thus, FFR and the relation between FFR and DS of lesions subtending AMI was not significantly different from FFR of angiographically matched lesions in patients without AMI.

Citing Articles

Prognostic Impact of Coronary Flow Reserve in Patients With Reduced Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction.

Joh H, Shin D, Lee J, Lee S, Hong D, Choi K J Am Heart Assoc. 2022; 11(15):e025841.

PMID: 35876408 PMC: 9375477. DOI: 10.1161/JAHA.122.025841.


Fractional Flow Reserve: Patient Selection and Perspectives.

Peper J, Becker L, Van Kuijk J, Leiner T, Swaans M Vasc Health Risk Manag. 2021; 17:817-831.

PMID: 34934324 PMC: 8684425. DOI: 10.2147/VHRM.S286916.


Performing and Interpreting Fractional Flow Reserve Measurements in Clinical Practice: An Expert Consensus Document.

Achenbach S, Rudolph T, Rieber J, Eggebrecht H, Richardt G, Schmitz T Interv Cardiol. 2018; 12(2):97-109.

PMID: 29588737 PMC: 5808579. DOI: 10.15420/icr.2017:13:2.


Comprehensive assessment of coronary fractional flow reserve.

Qi X, Fan G, Zhu D, Ma W, Yang C Arch Med Sci. 2015; 11(3):483-93.

PMID: 26170840 PMC: 4495145. DOI: 10.5114/aoms.2015.52351.


Invasive evaluation of patients after reperfused STEMI: one-stop-shop for anatomy and physiology.

Samady H J Nucl Cardiol. 2010; 17(5):775-7.

PMID: 20730519 DOI: 10.1007/s12350-010-9283-6.