Quantitative Flow Ratio Identifies Nonculprit Coronary Lesions Requiring Revascularization in Patients With ST-Segment–Elevation Myocardial Infarction and Multivessel Disease

BACKGROUND—The nonculprit lesion (NCL) management in ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction patients with multivessel disease is debated. We sought to assess whether quantitative flow ratio (QFR), a noninvasive tool to identify potentially flow-limiting lesions, may be reliable in this scenario....

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Circulation. Cardiovascular interventions 2018-02, Vol.11 (2), p.e006023-e006023
Hauptverfasser: Spitaleri, Giosafat, Tebaldi, Matteo, Biscaglia, Simone, Westra, Jelmer, Brugaletta, Salvatore, Erriquez, Andrea, Passarini, Giulia, Brieda, Alessandro, Leone, Antonio Maria, Picchi, Andrea, Ielasi, Alfonso, Di Girolamo, Domenico, Trani, Carlo, Ferrari, Roberto, Reiber, Johan H.C, Valgimigli, Marco, Sabatè, Manel, Campo, Gianluca
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:BACKGROUND—The nonculprit lesion (NCL) management in ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction patients with multivessel disease is debated. We sought to assess whether quantitative flow ratio (QFR), a noninvasive tool to identify potentially flow-limiting lesions, may be reliable in this scenario. METHODS AND RESULTS—The present proof-of-concept study is based on a 3-step process(1) identification of the QFR reproducibility in NCLs assessment (cohort A, n=31); (2) prospective validation of QFR diagnostic accuracy in respect to fractional flow reserve (cohort B, n=45); and (3) investigation of long-term clinical outcomes of NCLs stratified according to QFR (cohort C, n=110). A blinded core laboratory computed QFR values for all NCLs. Cohort A showed a good correlation and agreement between QFR values at index (acute) and at staged (subacute, 3–4 days later) procedures (r=0.98; 95% confidence interval, 0.96–0.99; mean difference, 0.004 [−0.027 to 0.34]). The inter-rater agreement was κ=0.9. In cohort B, fractional flow reserve and QFR identified 16 (33%) and 17 (35%) NCLs potentially flow limiting. Sensitivity, specificity, negative, and positive predictive values were 88%, 97%, 94%, and 94%. The area under the receiver operating characteristics curve was 0.96 (95% confidence interval, 0.89–0.99). Finally, in cohort C, we identified 110 ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction patients where at least 1 NCL was left untreated. Patients with NCLs showing a QFR value ≤0.80 were at higher risk of adverse events (hazard ratio, 2.3; 95% confidence interval, 1.2–4.5; P=0.01). CONCLUSIONS—In a limited and selected study population, our study showed that QFR computation may be a safe and reliable tool to guide coronary revascularization of NCLs in ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction patients.
ISSN:1941-7640
1941-7632
DOI:10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.117.006023