» Articles » PMID: 24211503

Multicenter Core Laboratory Comparison of the Instantaneous Wave-free Ratio and Resting Pd/Pa with Fractional Flow Reserve: the RESOLVE Study

Abstract

Objectives: This study sought to examine the diagnostic accuracy of the instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) and resting distal coronary artery pressure/aortic pressure (Pd/Pa) with respect to hyperemic fractional flow reserve (FFR) in a core laboratory-based multicenter collaborative study.

Background: FFR is an index of the severity of coronary stenosis that has been clinically validated in 3 prospective randomized trials. iFR and Pd/Pa are nonhyperemic pressure-derived indices of the severity of stenosis with discordant reports regarding their accuracy with respect to FFR.

Methods: iFR, resting Pd/Pa, and FFR were measured in 1,768 patients from 15 clinical sites. An independent physiology core laboratory performed blinded off-line analysis of all raw data. The primary objectives were to determine specific iFR and Pd/Pa thresholds with ≥90% accuracy in predicting ischemic versus nonischemic FFR (on the basis of an FFR cut point of 0.80) and the proportion of patients falling beyond those thresholds.

Results: Of 1,974 submitted lesions, 381 (19.3%) were excluded because of suboptimal acquisition, leaving 1,593 for final analysis. On receiver-operating characteristic analysis, the optimal iFR cut point for FFR ≤0.80 was 0.90 (C statistic: 0.81 [95% confidence interval: 0.79 to 0.83]; overall accuracy: 80.4%) and for Pd/Pa was 0.92 (C statistic: 0.82 [95% confidence interval: 0.80 to 0.84]; overall accuracy: 81.5%), with no significant difference between these resting measures. iFR and Pd/Pa had ≥90% accuracy to predict a positive or negative FFR in 64.9% (62.6% to 67.3%) and 48.3% (45.6% to 50.5%) of lesions, respectively.

Conclusions: This comprehensive core laboratory analysis comparing iFR and Pd/Pa with FFR demonstrated an overall accuracy of ~80% for both nonhyperemic indices, which can be improved to ≥90% in a subset of lesions. Clinical outcome studies are required to determine whether the use of iFR or Pd/Pa might obviate the need for hyperemia in selected patients.

Citing Articles

Dobutamine stress echocardiography after positive CCTA: diagnostic performance using fractional flow reserve and instantaneous wave-free ratio as reference standards.

Braten A, Holte E, Wiseth R, Aakhus S Open Heart. 2024; 11(2).

PMID: 39349050 PMC: 11448196. DOI: 10.1136/openhrt-2024-002899.


Physiology-Guided Deferral of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in the Real World.

Petraco R, Bahl R J Soc Cardiovasc Angiogr Interv. 2024; 2(5):101112.

PMID: 39132406 PMC: 11308855. DOI: 10.1016/j.jscai.2023.101112.


Intracoronary Diagnostics in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome.

Sun Q, Liu M, Zeng M, Jia H Rev Cardiovasc Med. 2024; 24(2):45.

PMID: 39077404 PMC: 11273117. DOI: 10.31083/j.rcm2402045.


An Overview of Computational Coronary Physiology Technologies Based on Medical Imaging and Artificial Intelligence.

Li B, Chen H, Wang H, Hong L, Yang L Rev Cardiovasc Med. 2024; 25(6):211.

PMID: 39076307 PMC: 11270081. DOI: 10.31083/j.rcm2506211.


Myocardial Ischemia: Differentiating between Epicardial Coronary Artery Atherosclerosis, Microvascular Dysfunction and Vasospasm in the Catheterization Laboratory.

Monizzi G, Di Lenarda F, Gallinoro E, Bartorelli A J Clin Med. 2024; 13(14).

PMID: 39064213 PMC: 11277575. DOI: 10.3390/jcm13144172.