Prognostic Implications of Increased and Final Quantitative Flow Ratios in Patients Treated with Drug-coated Balloons Physiological Evaluation After DCB in De Novo Lesions

Overview

Journal BMC Cardiovasc Disord

Publisher Biomed Central

Specialty Cardiology & Vascular Diseases

Date 2024 Dec 26

PMID 39725897

Authors

Li Lin

YaoDong Ding

Yida Tang

Guisong Wang

Guosheng Fu

Lefeng Wang

Lianglong Chen

Xi Liu

Bin Liu

Hui Chen

Gang Liu

Qiang Tang

Yong Zeng

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Few studies investigated the implications of post-PCI QFR and post-PCI ΔQFR (absolute increase of QFR) in de novo lesions of small coronary disease after drug-coated balloon (DCB).

Objectives: We sought to investigate the prognostic implications of post-PCI QFR and post-PCI ΔQFR in patients who received DCB only.

Methods: Patients were divided according to the optimal cutoff value of the post-PCI QFR and the post-PCI ΔQFR. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), including target vessel revascularization (TVR), cardiac death, and myocardial infarction (MI).

Results: The optimal cutoff values of QFR and ΔQFR for the MACE rate were 0.86 and 0.57, respectively. There were 175 patients (61.2%) with a high QFR (≥ 0.86) and 113 patients (39.5%) with a high ΔQFR (≥ 0.57) after PCI. The MACE rate was significantly higher in patients with a low QFR compared to a high QFR (5.7% vs. 27.0%, hazard ratio [HR]: 3.632, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.872 to 7.044, P < 0.001). The MACE rate was higher in patients with a low ΔQFR increase compared to those with high ΔQFR (4.4% vs. 20.2%, HR: 4.700, 95%CI: 2.430 to 9.089, P = 0.001). In multivariable model, a low post-PCI QFR and a low post-PCI ΔQFR was independent predictor of MACE (adjusted HR: 4.071, 95%CI: 2.037 to 8.135, P = 0.001).

Conclusions: After DCB in de novo lesions of small coronary disease, both post-PCI QFR and ΔQFR showed similar prognostic implications in MACE.

References

Funatsu A, Nakamura S, Inoue N, Nanto S, Nakamura M, Iwabuchi M . A multicenter randomized comparison of paclitaxel-coated balloon with plain balloon angioplasty in patients with small vessel disease. Clin Res Cardiol. 2017; 106(10):824-832. DOI: 10.1007/s00392-017-1126-x. View

Cortese B, di Palma G, Garcia Guimaraes M, Piraino D, Orrego P, Buccheri D . Drug-Coated Balloon Versus Drug-Eluting Stent for Small Coronary Vessel Disease: PICCOLETO II Randomized Clinical Trial. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2020; 13(24):2840-2849. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcin.2020.08.035. View

Kornowski R, Lavi I, Pellicano M, Xaplanteris P, Vaknin-Assa H, Assali A . Fractional Flow Reserve Derived From Routine Coronary Angiograms. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016; 68(20):2235-2237. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2016.08.051. View

Lee S, Kim J, Lefieux A, Molony D, Shin D, Hwang D . Clinical and Prognostic Impact From Objective Analysis of Post-Angioplasty Fractional Flow Reserve Pullback. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2021; 14(17):1888-1900. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcin.2021.07.014. View

Kleber F, Schulz A, Waliszewski M, Hauschild T, Bohm M, Dietz U . Local paclitaxel induces late lumen enlargement in coronary arteries after balloon angioplasty. Clin Res Cardiol. 2014; 104(3):217-25. DOI: 10.1007/s00392-014-0775-2. View

Li L, Guan C, Meng S, Bai Y, Zhang Z, Zou K . Short- and long-term functional results following drug-coated balloons versus drug- eluting stents in small coronary vessels: The RESTORE quantitative flow ratio study. Int J Cardiol. 2020; 327:45-51. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2020.11.035. View

Neumann F, Sousa-Uva M, Ahlsson A, Alfonso F, Banning A, Benedetto U . 2018 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization. Eur Heart J. 2018; 40(2):87-165. DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehy394. View

Huber M, Mooney J, Madison J, Mooney M . Use of a morphologic classification to predict clinical outcome after dissection from coronary angioplasty. Am J Cardiol. 1991; 68(5):467-71. DOI: 10.1016/0002-9149(91)90780-o. View

Tebaldi M, Biscaglia S, Fineschi M, Musumeci G, Marchese A, Leone A . Evolving Routine Standards in Invasive Hemodynamic Assessment of Coronary Stenosis: The Nationwide Italian SICI-GISE Cross-Sectional ERIS Study. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2018; 11(15):1482-1491. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcin.2018.04.037. View

10.

Jeger R, Farah A, Ohlow M, Mangner N, Mobius-Winkler S, Leibundgut G . Drug-coated balloons for small coronary artery disease (BASKET-SMALL 2): an open-label randomised non-inferiority trial. Lancet. 2018; 392(10150):849-856. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31719-7. View

11.

Biscaglia S, Uretsky B, Barbato E, Collet C, Onuma Y, Jeremias A . Invasive Coronary Physiology After Stent Implantation: Another Step Toward Precision Medicine. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2021; 14(3):237-246. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcin.2020.10.055. View

12.

Xu B, Tu S, Song L, Jin Z, Yu B, Fu G . Angiographic quantitative flow ratio-guided coronary intervention (FAVOR III China): a multicentre, randomised, sham-controlled trial. Lancet. 2021; 398(10317):2149-2159. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)02248-0. View

13.

Dai N, Yuan S, Dou K, Zhang R, Hu N, He J . Prognostic Implications of Prestent Pullback Pressure Gradient and Poststent Quantitative Flow Ratio in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention. J Am Heart Assoc. 2022; 11(11):e024903. PMC: 9238737. DOI: 10.1161/JAHA.121.024903. View

14.

Uretsky B, Agarwal S, Vallurupalli S, Al-Hawwas M, Miller K, Biscaglia S . Trans-Stent FFR Gradient as a Modifiable Integrant in Predicting Long-Term Target Vessel Failure. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2022; 15(21):2192-2202. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcin.2022.08.036. View

15.

Thygesen K, Alpert J, Jaffe A, Chaitman B, White H, Katus H . Third universal definition of myocardial infarction. Circulation. 2012; 126(16):2020-35. DOI: 10.1161/CIR.0b013e31826e1058. View

16.

Meng P, Liu B, Li L, Yin D, Zhang H, Pan D . Cut-off values of lesion and vessel quantitative flow ratio in de novo coronary lesion post-drug-coated balloon therapy predicting vessel restenosis at mid-term follow-up. Chin Med J (Engl). 2021; 134(12):1450-1456. PMC: 8213272. DOI: 10.1097/CM9.0000000000001577. View

17.

Zhang R, Xu B, Dou K, Guan C, Zhao Y, Wang X . Post-PCI outcomes predicted by pre-intervention simulation of residual quantitative flow ratio using augmented reality. Int J Cardiol. 2022; 352:33-39. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2022.01.054. View

18.

Cutlip D, Windecker S, Mehran R, Boam A, Cohen D, van Es G . Clinical end points in coronary stent trials: a case for standardized definitions. Circulation. 2007; 115(17):2344-51. DOI: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.106.685313. View

19.

Tang Y, Qiao S, Su X, Chen Y, Jin Z, Chen H . Drug-Coated Balloon Versus Drug-Eluting Stent for Small-Vessel Disease: The RESTORE SVD China Randomized Trial. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2018; 11(23):2381-2392. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcin.2018.09.009. View

20.

Tu S, Westra J, Yang J, von Birgelen C, Ferrara A, Pellicano M . Diagnostic Accuracy of Fast Computational Approaches to Derive Fractional Flow Reserve From Diagnostic Coronary Angiography: The International Multicenter FAVOR Pilot Study. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016; 9(19):2024-2035. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcin.2016.07.013. View