Top

Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics

Published in:

Open Access 17-02-2024 | Angiography | Expert Consensus Document

Consensus document on the clinical application of invasive functional coronary angiography from the Japanese Association of Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics

Authors: Taku Asano, Toru Tanigaki, Kazumasa Ikeda, Masafumi Ono, Hiroyoshi Yokoi, Yoshio Kobayashi, Ken Kozuma, Nobuhiro Tanaka, Yoshiaki Kawase, Hitoshi Matsuo

Published in: Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics | Issue 2/2024

Abstract

Invasive functional coronary angiography (FCA), an angiography-derived physiological index of the functional significance of coronary obstruction, is a novel physiological assessment tool for coronary obstruction that does not require the utilization of a pressure wire. This technology enables operators to rapidly evaluate the functional relevance of coronary stenoses during and even after angiography while reducing the burden of cost and complication risks related to the pressure wire. FCA can be used for treatment decision-making for revascularization, strategy planning for percutaneous coronary intervention, and procedure optimization. Currently, various software-computing FCAs are available worldwide, with unique features in their computation algorithms and functions. With the emerging application of this novel technology in various clinical scenarios, the Japanese Association of Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics task force was created to outline expert consensus on the clinical use of FCA. This consensus document advocates optimal clinical applications of FCA according to currently available evidence while summarizing the concept, history, limitations, and future perspectives of FCA along with globally available software.

Graphical abstract

Overview and proposed clinical applications of functional coronary angiography (FCA). The FCA was developed according to computed fluid dynamics (CFD), considering the pressure drop across the coronary stenosis. CFD analysis was performed with a three-dimensional coronary model derived from angiography, allowing the calculation of the physiological index without the use of a pressure wire. Another direction of development in FCA is using artificial intelligence throughout the entire process, enabling “hands-free” FFR simulation. The advantage of the FCA is that it eliminates the use of a pressure wire, resulting in reduced invasiveness, shorter procedure times, and reduced medical costs. However, FCA requires high-quality angiography for a clear visualization of the lesion. In addition, the current version of FCA requires several manual corrections; thus, its reproducibility is limited. Further data on clinical outcomes after the use of FCA, such as percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with FCA guidance, are warranted. The consensus group of the Japanese Association of Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics proposed the application of FCA in various clinical scenarios considering the advantages of this technology. QFR, quantitative flow ratio; iFR, instantaneous wave-free ratio; CCS, chronic coronary syndrome; ACS, acute coronary syndrome; MVD, multivessel disease; AMI, acute myocardial infarction.

Gotberg M, Cook CM, Sen S, Nijjer S, Escaned J, Davies JE. The evolving future of instantaneous wave-free ratio and fractional flow reserve. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;70(11):1379–402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2017.07.770.CrossRefPubMed

De Bruyne B, Fearon WF, Pijls NH, Barbato E, Tonino P, Piroth Z, et al. Fractional flow reserve-guided PCI for stable coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med. 2014;371(13):1208–17. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1408758.CrossRefPubMed

De Bruyne B, Pijls NH, Kalesan B, Barbato E, Tonino PA, Piroth Z, et al. Fractional flow reserve-guided PCI versus medical therapy in stable coronary disease. N Engl J Med. 2012;367(11):991–1001. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1205361.CrossRefPubMed

Knuuti J, Wijns W, Saraste A, Capodanno D, Barbato E, Funck-Brentano C, et al. 2019 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of chronic coronary syndromes. Eur Heart J. 2020;41(3):407–77. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehz425.CrossRefPubMed

Lawton JS, Tamis-Holland JE, Bangalore S, Bates ER, Beckie TM, Bischoff JM, et al. 2021 ACC/AHA/SCAI Guideline for Coronary Artery Revascularization: Executive Summary: a Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines. Circulation. 2022;145(3):e4–17. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIR.0000000000001039.CrossRefPubMed

Nakano S, Kohsaka S, Chikamori T, Fukushima K, Kobayashi Y, Kozuma K, et al. JCS 2022 guideline focused update on diagnosis and treatment in patients with stable coronary artery disease. Circ J. 2022;86(5):882–915. https://doi.org/10.1253/circj.CJ-21-1041.CrossRefPubMed

Pijls NH, van Son JA, Kirkeeide RL, De Bruyne B, Gould KL. Experimental basis of determining maximum coronary, myocardial, and collateral blood flow by pressure measurements for assessing functional stenosis severity before and after percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. Circulation. 1993;87(4):1354–67. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.cir.87.4.1354.CrossRefPubMed

Park SJ, Kang SJ, Ahn JM, Shim EB, Kim YT, Yun SC, et al. Visual-functional mismatch between coronary angiography and fractional flow reserve. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2012;5(10):1029–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2012.07.007.CrossRefPubMed

Faria D, Hennessey B, Shabbir A, Mejia-Renteria H, Wang L, Lee JM, et al. Functional coronary angiography for the assessment of the epicardial vessels and the microcirculation. EuroIntervention. 2023;19(3):203–21. https://doi.org/10.4244/EIJ-D-22-00969.CrossRefPubMed

10.

Morris PD, Ryan D, Morton AC, Lycett R, Lawford PV, Hose DR, et al. Virtual fractional flow reserve from coronary angiography: modeling the significance of coronary lesions: results from the VIRTU-1 (VIRTUal Fractional Flow Reserve From Coronary Angiography) study. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2013;6(2):149–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2012.08.024.CrossRefPubMed

11.

Papafaklis MI, Muramatsu T, Ishibashi Y, Lakkas LS, Nakatani S, Bourantas CV, et al. Fast virtual functional assessment of intermediate coronary lesions using routine angiographic data and blood flow simulation in humans: comparison with pressure wire—fractional flow reserve. EuroIntervention. 2014;10(5):574–83. https://doi.org/10.4244/EIJY14M07_01.CrossRefPubMed

12.

Tu S, Westra J, Yang J, von Birgelen C, Ferrara A, Pellicano M, et al. 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):2024–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2016.07.013.CrossRefPubMed

13.

Kornowski R, Lavi I, Pellicano M, Xaplanteris P, Vaknin-Assa H, Assali A, et al. Fractional flow reserve derived from routine coronary angiograms. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016;68(20):2235–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2016.08.051.CrossRefPubMed

14.

Mejia-Renteria H, Lee JM, Choi KH, Lee SH, Wang L, Kakuta T, et al. Coronary microcirculation assessment using functional angiography: development of a wire-free method applicable to conventional coronary angiograms. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2021;98(6):1027–37. https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.29863.CrossRefPubMed

15.

Ai H, Feng Y, Gong Y, Zheng B, Jin Q, Zhang HP, et al. Coronary angiography-derived index of microvascular resistance. Front Physiol. 2020;11: 605356. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2020.605356.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

16.

Hong H, Li C, Gutierrez-Chico JL, Wang Z, Huang J, Chu M, et al. Radial wall strain: a novel angiographic measure of plaque composition and vulnerability. EuroIntervention. 2022;18(12):1001–10. https://doi.org/10.4244/EIJ-D-22-00537.CrossRefPubMed

17.

Roguin A, Abu Dogosh A, Feld Y, Konigstein M, Lerman A, Koifman E. Early feasibility of automated artificial intelligence angiography based fractional flow reserve estimation. Am J Cardiol. 2021;139:8–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2020.10.022.CrossRefPubMed

18.

Tu S, Xu L, Ligthart J, Xu B, Witberg K, Sun Z, et al. In vivo comparison of arterial lumen dimensions assessed by co-registered three-dimensional (3D) quantitative coronary angiography, intravascular ultrasound and optical coherence tomography. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2012;28(6):1315–27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10554-012-0016-6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

19.

Gibson CM, Cannon CP, Daley WL, Dodge JT Jr, Alexander B Jr, Marble SJ, et al. TIMI frame count: a quantitative method of assessing coronary artery flow. Circulation. 1996;93(5):879–88.CrossRefPubMed

20.

Xu B, Tu S, Qiao S, Qu X, Chen Y, Yang J, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of angiography-based quantitative flow ratio measurements for online assessment of coronary stenosis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;70(25):3077–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2017.10.035.CrossRefPubMed

21.

Westra J, Tu S, Campo G, Qiao S, Matsuo H, Qu X, et al. Diagnostic performance of quantitative flow ratio in prospectively enrolled patients: An individual patient-data meta-analysis. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2019;94(5):693–701. https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.28283.CrossRefPubMed

22.

Witberg G, De Bruyne B, Fearon WF, Achenbach S, Engstrom T, Matsuo H, et al. Diagnostic performance of angiogram-derived fractional flow reserve: a pooled analysis of 5 prospective cohort studies. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2020;13(4):488–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2019.10.045.CrossRefPubMed

23.

Witberg G, Bental T, Levi A, Talmor-Barkan Y, Rotholz A, Tanigaki T, et al. Clinical outcomes of FFRangio-guided treatment for coronary artery disease. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2022;15(4):468–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2021.11.039.CrossRefPubMed

24.

Omori H, Witberg G, Kawase Y, Tanigaki T, Okamoto S, Hirata T, et al. Angiogram based fractional flow reserve in patients with dual/triple vessel coronary artery disease. Int J Cardiol. 2019;283:17–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcard.2019.01.072.CrossRefPubMed

25.

Masdjedi K, van Zandvoort LJC, Balbi MM, Gijsen FJH, Ligthart JMR, Rutten MCM, et al. Validation of a three-dimensional quantitative coronary angiography-based software to calculate fractional flow reserve: the FAST study. EuroIntervention. 2020;16(7):591–9. https://doi.org/10.4244/EIJ-D-19-00466.CrossRefPubMed

26.

Masdjedi K, Tanaka N, Van Belle E, Porouchani S, Linke A, Woitek FJ, et al. Vessel fractional flow reserve (vFFR) for the assessment of stenosis severity: the FAST II study. EuroIntervention. 2022;17(18):1498–505. https://doi.org/10.4244/EIJ-D-21-00471.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

27.

Ikeda K, Kobayashi M, Chikamori T, Yanaka Y, Takagi R, Kani J, et al. Comparison between the diagnostic performance of vessel fractional flow reserve and nonhyperemic pressure ratio for functionally significant coronary stenosis severity as assessed by fractional flow reserve. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2023;101(1):72–8. https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.30511.CrossRefPubMed

28.

Muramatsu T, Kozuma K, Tanabe K, Morino Y, Ako J, Nakamura S, et al. Clinical expert consensus document on drug-coated balloon for coronary artery disease from the Japanese Association of Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics. Cardiovasc Interv Ther. 2023;38(2):166–76. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12928-023-00921-2.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

29.

Jeger RV, Eccleshall S, Wan Ahmad WA, Ge J, Poerner TC, Shin ES, et al. Drug-coated balloons for coronary artery disease: third report of the International DCB Consensus Group. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2020;13(12):1391–402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2020.02.043.CrossRefPubMed

30.

Collet C, Onuma Y, Sonck J, Asano T, Vandeloo B, Kornowski R, et al. Diagnostic performance of angiography-derived fractional flow reserve: a systematic review and Bayesian meta-analysis. Eur Heart J. 2018;39(35):3314–21. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehy445.CrossRefPubMed

31.

Cerrato E, Mejia-Renteria H, Dehbi HM, Ahn JM, Cook C, Dupouy P, et al. Revascularization deferral of nonculprit stenoses on the basis of fractional flow reserve: 1-year outcomes of 8,579 patients. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2020;13(16):1894–903. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2020.05.024.CrossRefPubMed

32.

Xu B, Tu S, Song L, Jin Z, Yu B, Fu G, et al. Angiographic quantitative flow ratio-guided coronary intervention (FAVOR III China): a multicentre, randomised, sham-controlled trial. Lancet. 2021;398(10317):2149–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(21)02248-0.CrossRefPubMed

33.

Andersen BK, Sejr-Hansen M, Westra J, Campo G, Efterkhari A, Tu S, et al. Quantitative flow ratio versus fractional flow reserve for guiding percutaneous coronary intervention: design and rationale of the randomised FAVOR III Europe Japan trial. EuroIntervention. 2023;18(16):e1358–64. https://doi.org/10.4244/EIJ-D-21-00214.CrossRefPubMed

34.

Baranauskas A, Peace A, Kibarskis A, Shannon J, Abraitis V, Bajoras V, et al. FFR result post PCI is suboptimal in long diffuse coronary artery disease. EuroIntervention. 2016;12(12):1473–80. https://doi.org/10.4244/EIJ-D-15-00514.CrossRefPubMed

35.

Matsuo A, Shimoo S, Takamatsu K, Tsuji Y, Kyodo A, Mera K, et al. Visualization of the improvement of myocardial perfusion after coronary intervention using motorized fractional flow reserve pullback curve. Cardiovasc Interv Ther. 2018;33(2):99–108. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12928-016-0448-3.CrossRefPubMed

36.

Collet C, Sonck J, Vandeloo B, Mizukami T, Roosens B, Lochy S, et al. Measurement of hyperemic pullback pressure gradients to characterize patterns of coronary atherosclerosis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019;74(14):1772–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2019.07.072.CrossRefPubMed

37.

Dai N, Zhang R, Hu N, Guan C, Zou T, Qiao Z, et al. Integrated coronary disease burden and patterns to discriminate vessels benefiting from percutaneous coronary intervention. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2022;99(1):E12–21. https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.29983.CrossRefPubMed

38.

Kikuta Y, Cook CM, Sharp ASP, Salinas P, Kawase Y, Shiono Y, et al. Pre-angioplasty instantaneous wave-free ratio pullback predicts hemodynamic outcome in humans with coronary artery disease: primary results of the international multicenter iFR GRADIENT Registry. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2018;11(8):757–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2018.03.005.CrossRefPubMed

39.

Zhang R, Xu B, Dou K, Guan C, Zhao Y, Wang X, et al. Post-PCI outcomes predicted by pre-intervention simulation of residual quantitative flow ratio using augmented reality. Int J Cardiol. 2022;352:33–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcard.2022.01.054.CrossRefPubMed

40.

van Diemen PA, de Winter RW, Schumacher SP, Bom MJ, Driessen RS, Everaars H, et al. Residual quantitative flow ratio to estimate post-percutaneous coronary intervention fractional flow reserve. J Interv Cardiol. 2021;2021:4339451. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/4339451.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

41.

Rubimbura V, Guillon B, Fournier S, Amabile N, Chi Pan C, Combaret N, et al. Quantitative flow ratio virtual stenting and post stenting correlations to post stenting fractional flow reserve measurements from the DOCTORS (Does Optical Coherence Tomography Optimize Results of Stenting) study population. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2020;96(6):1145–53. https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.28615.CrossRefPubMed

42.

Tomaniak M, Neleman T, Ziedses des Plantes A, Masdjedi K, van Zandvoort LJC, Kochman J, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of coronary angiography-based vessel fractional flow reserve (vFFR) virtual stenting. J Clin Med. 2022. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm11051397.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

43.

Fearon WF, Achenbach S, Engstrom T, Assali A, Shlofmitz R, Jeremias A, et al. Accuracy of fractional flow reserve derived from coronary angiography. Circulation. 2019;139(4):477–84. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.118.037350.CrossRefPubMed

44.

Westra J, Andersen BK, Campo G, Matsuo H, Koltowski L, Eftekhari A, et al. Diagnostic performance of in-procedure angiography-derived quantitative flow reserve compared to pressure-derived fractional flow reserve: the FAVOR II Europe-Japan Study. J Am Heart Assoc. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.118.009603.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

45.

Westra J, Tu S, Winther S, Nissen L, Vestergaard MB, Andersen BK, et al. Evaluation of coronary artery stenosis by quantitative flow ratio during invasive coronary angiography: the WIFI II Study (Wire-Free Functional Imaging II). Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2018;11(3): e007107. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCIMAGING.117.007107.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

46.

Peper J, van Hamersvelt RW, Rensing B, van Kuijk JP, Voskuil M, Berg JMT, et al. Diagnostic performance and clinical implications for enhancing a hybrid quantitative flow ratio-FFR revascularization decision-making strategy. Sci Rep. 2021;11(1):6425. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-85933-9.ADSCrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

47.

Agarwal SK, Kasula S, Hacioglu Y, Ahmed Z, Uretsky BF, Hakeem A. Utilizing post-intervention fractional flow reserve to optimize acute results and the relationship to long-term outcomes. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;9(10):1022–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2016.01.046.CrossRefPubMed

48.

Piroth Z, Toth GG, Tonino PAL, Barbato E, Aghlmandi S, Curzen N, et al. Prognostic value of fractional flow reserve measured immediately after drug-eluting stent implantation. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.116.005233.CrossRefPubMed

49.

Hwang D, Koo BK, Zhang J, Park J, Yang S, Kim M, et al. Prognostic implications of fractional flow reserve after coronary stenting: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Netw Open. 2022;5(9): e2232842. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.32842.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

50.

Kogame N, Takahashi K, Tomaniak M, Chichareon P, Modolo R, Chang CC, et al. Clinical implication of quantitative flow ratio after percutaneous coronary intervention for 3-vessel disease. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2019;12(20):2064–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2019.08.009.CrossRefPubMed

51.

Biscaglia S, Tebaldi M, Brugaletta S, Cerrato E, Erriquez A, Passarini G, et al. Prognostic value of QFR measured immediately after successful stent implantation: The International Multicenter Prospective HAWKEYE Study. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2019;12(20):2079–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2019.06.003.CrossRefPubMed

52.

Neleman T, Scoccia A, Masdjedi K, Tomaniak M, Ligthart JMR, Witberg KT, et al. The prognostic value of angiography-based vessel fractional flow reserve after percutaneous coronary intervention: the FAST Outcome study. Int J Cardiol. 2022;359:14–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcard.2022.04.021.CrossRefPubMed

53.

Smits PC, Abdel-Wahab M, Neumann FJ, Boxma-de Klerk BM, Lunde K, Schotborgh CE, et al. Fractional flow reserve-guided multivessel angioplasty in myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 2017;376(13):1234–44. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1701067.CrossRefPubMed

54.

Engstrom T, Kelbaek H, Helqvist S, Hofsten DE, Klovgaard L, Holmvang L, et al. Complete revascularisation versus treatment of the culprit lesion only in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease (DANAMI-3-PRIMULTI): an open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2015;386(9994):665–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(15)60648-1.CrossRefPubMed

55.

Lauri FM, Macaya F, Mejia-Renteria H, Goto S, Yeoh J, Nakayama M, et al. Angiography-derived functional assessment of non-culprit coronary stenoses in primary percutaneous coronary intervention. EuroIntervention. 2020;15(18):e1594–601. https://doi.org/10.4244/EIJ-D-18-01165.CrossRefPubMed

56.

Bar S, Kavaliauskaite R, Ueki Y, Otsuka T, Kelbaek H, Engstrom T, et al. Quantitative flow ratio to predict nontarget vessel-related events at 5 years in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing angiography-guided revascularization. J Am Heart Assoc. 2021;10(9): e019052. https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.120.019052.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

57.

Groenland FTW, Huang J, Scoccia A, Neleman T, Ziedses Des Plantes AC, Nuis RJ, et al. Vessel fractional flow reserve-based non-culprit lesion reclassification in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: impact on treatment strategy and clinical outcome (FAST STEMI I study). Int J Cardiol. 2023;373:33–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcard.2022.11.043.CrossRefPubMed

58.

Puymirat E, Cayla G, Simon T, Steg PG, Montalescot G, Durand-Zaleski I, et al. Multivessel PCI Guided by FFR or angiography for myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 2021;385(4):297–308. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2104650.CrossRefPubMed

59.

Lee JM, Kim HK, Park KH, Choo EH, Kim CJ, Lee SH, et al. Fractional flow reserve versus angiography-guided strategy in acute myocardial infarction with multivessel disease: a randomized trial. Eur Heart J. 2023;44(6):473–84. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehac763.CrossRefPubMed

60.

Wang L, Travieso A, van der Hoeven N, van Leeuwen MAH, Janssens G, Mejia-Renteria H, et al. Improved nonculprit stenosis assessment in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction using quantitative flow ratio. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2023.04.045.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

61.

Thim T, van der Hoeven NW, Musto C, Nijveldt R, Gotberg M, Engstrom T, et al. Evaluation and management of nonculprit lesions in STEMI. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2020;13(10):1145–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2020.02.030.CrossRefPubMed

62.

Van Herck PL, Carlier SG, Claeys MJ, Haine SE, Gorissen P, Miljoen H, et al. Coronary microvascular dysfunction after myocardial infarction: increased coronary zero flow pressure both in the infarcted and in the remote myocardium is mainly related to left ventricular filling pressure. Heart. 2007;93(10):1231–7. https://doi.org/10.1136/hrt.2006.100818.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

63.

Claessens TE, Van Herck PL, Matthys KS, Segers P, Vrints CJ, Verdonck PR. Influence of zero flow pressure on fractional flow reserve. Biomech Model Mechanobiol. 2004;3(1):48–55. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10237-004-0045-8.CrossRefPubMed

64.

Serruys PW, Morice MC, Kappetein AP, Colombo A, Holmes DR, Mack MJ, et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary-artery bypass grafting for severe coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med. 2009;360(10):961–72. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa0804626.CrossRefPubMed

65.

Nam CW, Mangiacapra F, Entjes R, Chung IS, Sels JW, Tonino PA, et al. Functional SYNTAX score for risk assessment in multivessel coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;58(12):1211–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2011.06.020.CrossRefPubMed

66.

Asano T, Katagiri Y, Chang CC, Kogame N, Chichareon P, Takahashi K, et al. Angiography-derived fractional flow reserve in the SYNTAX II trial: feasibility, diagnostic performance of quantitative flow ratio, and clinical prognostic value of functional SYNTAX score derived from quantitative flow ratio in patients with 3-vessel disease. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2019;12(3):259–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2018.09.023.CrossRefPubMed

67.

Zhang R, Song C, Guan C, Liu Q, Wang C, Xie L, et al. Prognostic value of quantitative flow ratio based functional SYNTAX score in patients with left main or multivessel coronary artery disease. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2020;13(10): e009155. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.120.009155.CrossRefPubMed

68.

Liontou C, Mejia-Renteria H, Lauri FM, Goto S, Lee HJ, Nakayama M, et al. Quantitative flow ratio for functional evaluation of in-stent restenosis. EuroIntervention. 2021;17(5):e396–8. https://doi.org/10.4244/EIJ-D-18-00955.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

69.

Sejr-Hansen M, Christiansen EH, Ahmad Y, Vendrik J, Westra J, Holm NR, et al. Performance of quantitative flow ratio in patients with aortic stenosis undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2022;99(1):68–73. https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.29518.CrossRefPubMed

70.

Demola P, Colaiori I, Bosi D, Musto D’Amore S, Vitolo M, Benatti G, et al. Quantitative flow ratio-based outcomes in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation quaestio study. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2023;10:1188644. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2023.1188644.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

71.

Westra J, Sejr-Hansen M, Koltowski L, Mejia-Renteria H, Tu S, Kochman J, et al. Reproducibility of quantitative flow ratio: the QREP study. EuroIntervention. 2022;17(15):1252–9. https://doi.org/10.4244/EIJ-D-21-00425.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

72.

Huo Y, Finet G, Lefevre T, Louvard Y, Moussa I, Kassab GS. Optimal diameter of diseased bifurcation segment: a practical rule for percutaneous coronary intervention. EuroIntervention. 2012;7(11):1310–6. https://doi.org/10.4244/EIJV7I11A206.CrossRefPubMed

73.

Mejia-Renteria H, Lee JM, Lauri F, van der Hoeven NW, de Waard GA, Macaya F, et al. Influence of microcirculatory dysfunction on angiography-based functional assessment of coronary stenoses. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2018;11(8):741–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2018.02.014.CrossRefPubMed

74.

Kirigaya H, Okada K, Hibi K, Maejima N, Iwahashi N, Matsuzawa Y, et al. Diagnostic performance and limitation of quantitative flow ratio for functional assessment of intermediate coronary stenosis. J Cardiol. 2021;77(5):492–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jjcc.2020.11.002.CrossRefPubMed

75.

Johnson NP, Toth GG, Lai D, Zhu H, Acar G, Agostoni P, et al. Prognostic value of fractional flow reserve: linking physiologic severity to clinical outcomes. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;64(16):1641–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2014.07.973.CrossRefPubMed

76.

Ono M, Serruys PW, Patel MR, Escaned J, Akasaka T, Lavieren MAV, et al. A prospective multicenter validation study for a novel angiography-derived physiological assessment software: Rationale and design of the radiographic imaging validation and evaluation for Angio-iFR (ReVEAL iFR) study. Am Heart J. 2021;239:19–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ahj.2021.05.004.CrossRefPubMed

77.

Tu S, Ding D, Chang Y, Li C, Wijns W, Xu B. Diagnostic accuracy of quantitative flow ratio for assessment of coronary stenosis significance from a single angiographic view: A novel method based on bifurcation fractal law. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2021;97(Suppl 2):1040–7. https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.29592.CrossRefPubMed

78.

Zuo W, Sun R, Ji Z, Zuo P, Zhang X, Huang R, et al. Sex differences in Murray law-based quantitative flow ratio among patients with intermediate coronary lesions. J Am Heart Assoc. 2023;12(13): e029330. https://doi.org/10.1161/jaha.123.029330.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

79.

Yang J, Huang Y, Li X, Jia Q, Deng H, Xie N, et al. The effects of cardiac structure, valvular regurgitation, and left ventricular diastolic dysfunction on the diagnostic accuracy of Murray law-based quantitative flow ratio. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2023;10:1134623. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2023.1134623.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

80.

Zuo W, Sun R, Xu Y, Ji Z, Zhang R, Zhang X, et al. Impact of calcification on Murray law-based quantitative flow ratio for physiological assessment of intermediate coronary stenoses. Cardiol J. 2023. https://doi.org/10.5603/CJ.a2023.0045.CrossRefPubMed

81.

Fezzi S, Ding D, Scarsini R, Huang J, Sole PAD, Zhao Q, et al. Integrated assessment of computational coronary physiology from a single angiographic view in patients undergoing TAVI. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.123.013185.CrossRefPubMed

82.

Wang HY, Zhang R, Dou K, Huang Y, Xie L, Qiao Z, et al. Left main bifurcation stenting: impact of residual ischaemia on cardiovascular mortality. Eur Heart J. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehad318.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

83.

Onuma Y, Ninomiya K, Ono M, Akasaka T, Escaned J, Patel MR, et al. Accuracy of instantaneous wave-free ratio and fractional flow reserve derived from coronary angiography—ReVEAL iFR study. euroPCR2023.

84.

Ninomiya K, Serruys PW, Kotoku N, Zhou J, Kageyama S, Masuda S, et al. Anonymous comparison of various angiography-derived fractional flow reserve software with pressure-derived physiological assessment. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2023;16(14):1778–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2023.04.026.CrossRefPubMed

85.

Beltrame JF, Tavella R, Zeitz CJ. Beyond structural angiography: the emergence of functional coronary angiography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2022;79(24):2379–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2022.04.014.CrossRefPubMed

Title: Consensus document on the clinical application of invasive functional coronary angiography from the Japanese Association of Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics
Authors: Taku Asano
Toru Tanigaki
Kazumasa Ikeda
Masafumi Ono
Hiroyoshi Yokoi
Yoshio Kobayashi
Ken Kozuma
Nobuhiro Tanaka
Yoshiaki Kawase
Hitoshi Matsuo
Publication date: 17-02-2024
Publisher: Springer Nature Singapore
Keyword: Angiography
Published in: Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics / Issue 2/2024
Print ISSN: 1868-4300
Electronic ISSN: 1868-4297
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12928-024-00988-5

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Consensus document on the clinical application of invasive functional coronary angiography from the Japanese Association of Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics

Abstract

Graphical abstract

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Graphical abstract

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 2/2024

Bailout stenting for delayed coronary obstruction after self-expandable transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Coronary events in elderly patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation: a prespecified sub-analysis of the ANAFIE registry

Intravascular ultrasound guide chimney stenting during transcatheter aortic valve replacement

Pacing for better visualization of the left atrial appendage prior to transcatheter left atrial appendage closure

Impact of stent strut link location in proximal balloon edge dilation technique for bifurcation percutaneous coronary intervention

Feasibility of contrast-free left atrial appendage closure with WATCHMAN FLX device for patients with chronic kidney disease