VERIFY (VERification of Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio and
Fractional Flow Reserve for the Assessment of Coronary Artery
Stenosis Severity in EverydaY Practice)

J 2013

VERIFY (VERification of Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio and Fractional Flow Reserve for the Assessment of Coronary Artery Stenosis Severity in EverydaY Practice)

BERRY, Colin; Marcel van 't VEER; Nils WITT; Petr KALA; Otakar BOČEK et al.

Základní údaje

Originální název

VERIFY (VERification of Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio and Fractional Flow Reserve for the Assessment of Coronary Artery Stenosis Severity in EverydaY Practice)

Autoři

Vydání

Journal of The American College of Cardiology, USA, Elsevier Science Inc. 2013, 0735-1097

Další údaje

Jazyk

angličtina

Typ výsledku

Článek v odborném periodiku

Obor

30201 Cardiac and Cardiovascular systems

Stát vydavatele

Spojené státy

Utajení

není předmětem státního či obchodního tajemství

Impakt faktor

Impact factor: 15.343

Označené pro přenos do RIV

Ano

Kód RIV

RIV/00216224:14110/13:00071916

Organizační jednotka

Lékařská fakulta

DOI

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2012.09.065

UT WoS

000317191200009

Klíčová slova anglicky

adenosine; angina; FFR; hyperemia; iFR

Příznaky

Mezinárodní význam, Recenzováno

Změněno: 7. 2. 2014 15:30, Ing. Mgr. Věra Pospíšilíková

Anotace

V originále

Objectives This study sought to compare fractional flow reserve (FFR) with the instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) in patients with coronary artery disease and also to determine whether the iFR is independent of hyperemia. Background FFR is a validated index of coronary stenosis severity. FFR-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) improves clinical outcomes compared to angiographic guidance alone. iFR has been proposed as a new index of stenosis severity that can be measured without adenosine. Methods We conducted a prospective, multicenter, international study of 206 consecutive patients referred for PCI and a retrospective analysis of 500 archived pressure recordings. Aortic and distal coronary pressures were measured in duplicate in patients under resting conditions and during intravenous adenosine infusion at 140 mu g/kg/min. Results Compared to the FFR cut-off value of <= 0.80, the diagnostic accuracy of the iFR value of <= 0.80 was 60% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 53% to 67%) for all vessels studied and 51% (95% CI: 43% to 59%) for those patients with FFR in the range of 0.60 to 0.90. iFR was significantly influenced by the induction of hyperemia: mean +/- SD iFR at rest was 0.82 +/- 0.16 versus 0.64 +/- 0.18 with hyperemia (p < 0.001). Receiver operating characteristics confirmed that the diagnostic accuracy of iFR was similar to resting Pd/Pa and trans-stenotic pressure gradient and significantly inferior to hyperemic iFR. Analysis of our retrospectively acquired dataset showed similar results. Conclusions iFR correlates weakly with FFR and is not independent of hyperemia. iFR cannot be recommended for clinical decision making in patients with coronary artery disease. (Comparison of Fractional Flow Reserve Versus Instant Wave-Free Ratio for Assessment of Coronary Artery Stenosis Severity in Routine Practice; NCT01559493).

Citovat

BERRY, Colin; Marcel van 't VEER; Nils WITT; Petr KALA; Otakar BOČEK; Stylianos A PYXARAS; John D MCCLURE; William F FEARON; Emanuele BARBATO; Tonino A L PIM; Bernard De BRUYNE; Nico H J PIJLS a Keith G OLDROYD. VERIFY (VERification of Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio and Fractional Flow Reserve for the Assessment of Coronary Artery Stenosis Severity in EverydaY Practice). Journal of The American College of Cardiology. USA: Elsevier Science Inc., 2013, roč. 61, č. 13, s. 1421-1427. ISSN 0735-1097. Dostupné z: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2012.09.065.

@article{1164060,
   author = {Berry, Colin and Veer, Marcel van 't and Witt, Nils and Kala, Petr and Boček, Otakar and Pyxaras, Stylianos A and McClure, John D and Fearon, William F and Barbato, Emanuele and Pim, Tonino A L and Bruyne, Bernard De and Pijls, Nico H J and Oldroyd, Keith G},
   article_location = {USA},
   article_number = {13},
   doi = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2012.09.065},
   keywords = {adenosine; angina; FFR; hyperemia; iFR},
   language = {eng},
   issn = {0735-1097},
   journal = {Journal of The American College of Cardiology},
   title = {VERIFY (VERification of Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio and Fractional Flow Reserve for the Assessment of Coronary Artery Stenosis Severity in EverydaY Practice)},
   volume = {61},
   year = {2013}
}

TY  - JOUR
ID  - 1164060
AU  - Berry, Colin - Veer, Marcel van 't - Witt, Nils - Kala, Petr - Boček, Otakar - Pyxaras, Stylianos A - McClure, John D - Fearon, William F - Barbato, Emanuele - Pim, Tonino A L - Bruyne, Bernard De - Pijls, Nico H J - Oldroyd, Keith G
PY  - 2013
TI  - VERIFY (VERification of Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio and Fractional Flow Reserve for the Assessment of Coronary Artery Stenosis Severity in EverydaY Practice)
JF  - Journal of The American College of Cardiology
VL  - 61
IS  - 13
SP  - 1421-1427
EP  - 1421-1427
PB  - Elsevier Science Inc.
SN  - 07351097
KW  - adenosine
KW  - angina
KW  - FFR
KW  - hyperemia
KW  - iFR
N2  - Objectives This study sought to compare fractional flow reserve (FFR) with the instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) in patients with coronary artery disease and also to determine whether the iFR is independent of hyperemia. Background FFR is a validated index of coronary stenosis severity. FFR-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) improves clinical outcomes compared to angiographic guidance alone. iFR has been proposed as a new index of stenosis severity that can be measured without adenosine. Methods We conducted a prospective, multicenter, international study of 206 consecutive patients referred for PCI and a retrospective analysis of 500 archived pressure recordings. Aortic and distal coronary pressures were measured in duplicate in patients under resting conditions and during intravenous adenosine infusion at 140 mu g/kg/min. Results Compared to the FFR cut-off value of <= 0.80, the diagnostic accuracy of the iFR value of <= 0.80 was 60% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 53% to 67%) for all vessels studied and 51% (95% CI: 43% to 59%) for those patients with FFR in the range of 0.60 to 0.90. iFR was significantly influenced by the induction of hyperemia: mean +/- SD iFR at rest was 0.82 +/- 0.16 versus 0.64 +/- 0.18 with hyperemia (p < 0.001). Receiver operating characteristics confirmed that the diagnostic accuracy of iFR was similar to resting Pd/Pa and trans-stenotic pressure gradient and significantly inferior to hyperemic iFR. Analysis of our retrospectively acquired dataset showed similar results. Conclusions iFR correlates weakly with FFR and is not independent of hyperemia. iFR cannot be recommended for clinical decision making in patients with coronary artery disease. (Comparison of Fractional Flow Reserve Versus Instant Wave-Free Ratio for Assessment of Coronary Artery Stenosis Severity in Routine Practice; NCT01559493).
ER  -

BERRY, Colin; Marcel van 't VEER; Nils WITT; Petr KALA; Otakar BOČEK; Stylianos A PYXARAS; John D MCCLURE; William F FEARON; Emanuele BARBATO; Tonino A L PIM; Bernard De BRUYNE; Nico H J PIJLS a Keith G OLDROYD. VERIFY (VERification of Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio and Fractional Flow Reserve for the Assessment of Coronary Artery Stenosis Severity in EverydaY Practice). \textit{Journal of The American College of Cardiology}. USA: Elsevier Science Inc., 2013, roč.~61, č.~13, s.~1421-1427. ISSN~0735-1097. Dostupné z: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2012.09.065.

Přehled o publikaci