TY - JOUR
T1 - The Influence of Aortic Valve Obstruction on the Hyperemic Intracoronary Physiology: Difference Between Resting Pd/Pa and FFR in Aortic Stenosis
AU - Scarsini, Roberto
AU - De Maria, Giovanni L.
AU - De Maria, Giovanni Luigi
AU - Di Gioia, Giuseppe
AU - Kotronias, Rafail A.
AU - Aurigemma, Cristina
AU - Zimbardo, Giuseppe
AU - Burzotta, Francesco
AU - Leone, Antonio M.
AU - Leone, Antonio Maria
AU - Pesarini, Gabriele
AU - Trani, Carlo
AU - Crea, Filippo
AU - Kharbanda, Rajesh K.
AU - De Bruyne, Bernard
AU - Barbato, Emanuele
AU - Banning, Adrian
AU - Ribichini, Flavio
PY - 2019
Y1 - 2019
N2 - The reliability of fractional flow reserve (FFR) in aortic stenosis (AS) has been questioned because of the uncertain response to vasodilators. A retrospective multicenter cohort of 114 AS patients who underwent coronary physiology assessment was compared with 154 controls before and after propensity matching adjustment. The difference between resting distal coronary vs aortic pressure ratio (Pd/Pa) and FFR (ΔPd/Pa-FFR) was tested against the severity of AS. ΔPd/Pa-FFR was not influenced by the severity of AS in terms of aortic valve area (r = − 0.02, p = 0.83) and gradient (r = − 0.05, p = 0.64) or by the left ventricle hypertrophy (r = − 0.03, p = 0.88). Conversely, ΔPd/Pa-FFR was influenced by the presence of diabetes (r = − 0.24, p = 0.005), peripheral vascular disease (r = − 0.16, p = 0.047), and chronic kidney disease (r = − 0.19, p = 0.03). No significant difference was observed in the ΔPd/Pa-FFR between patients with AS and matched controls. Further studies are warranted to validate the FFR-guided revascularization in patients with AS.
AB - The reliability of fractional flow reserve (FFR) in aortic stenosis (AS) has been questioned because of the uncertain response to vasodilators. A retrospective multicenter cohort of 114 AS patients who underwent coronary physiology assessment was compared with 154 controls before and after propensity matching adjustment. The difference between resting distal coronary vs aortic pressure ratio (Pd/Pa) and FFR (ΔPd/Pa-FFR) was tested against the severity of AS. ΔPd/Pa-FFR was not influenced by the severity of AS in terms of aortic valve area (r = − 0.02, p = 0.83) and gradient (r = − 0.05, p = 0.64) or by the left ventricle hypertrophy (r = − 0.03, p = 0.88). Conversely, ΔPd/Pa-FFR was influenced by the presence of diabetes (r = − 0.24, p = 0.005), peripheral vascular disease (r = − 0.16, p = 0.047), and chronic kidney disease (r = − 0.19, p = 0.03). No significant difference was observed in the ΔPd/Pa-FFR between patients with AS and matched controls. Further studies are warranted to validate the FFR-guided revascularization in patients with AS.
KW - Aortic stenosis
KW - Coronary artery disease
KW - Fractional flow reserve
KW - Transcatheter aortic valve implantation
KW - Aortic stenosis
KW - Coronary artery disease
KW - Fractional flow reserve
KW - Transcatheter aortic valve implantation
UR - http://hdl.handle.net/10807/170941
U2 - 10.1007/s12265-019-09890-5
DO - 10.1007/s12265-019-09890-5
M3 - Article
SN - 1937-5387
VL - 12
SP - 539
EP - 550
JO - Journal of Cardiovascular Translational Research
JF - Journal of Cardiovascular Translational Research
ER -