Advertisement

Measuring pressure-derived fractional flow reserve through four french diagnostic catheters

      Abstract

      Measurement of fractional flow reserve (FFR) with a pressure wire is used to discriminate between patients with and without functionally significant lesions. FFR can be assessed through a conventional 4Fr diagnostic catheter, which is a more convenient method of assessment. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility, safety, repeatability, and reliability of routine FFR measurements through 4Fr diagnostic catheters. From a single-center prospective registry, results of FFR assessment through a 4Fr catheter were used to determine: (1) feasibility and safety, by the procedural success rate and immediate and 30-day clinical outcome; (2) repeatability, by the intraclass correlation coefficient and comparison of the difference (means ± 2 SDs); and (3) reliability, by comparison of results obtained using 4Fr versus 7Fr guiding catheters. During the study period, FFR was measured in 190 patients, in 122 using a diagnostic 4Fr catheter (study population) and in 68 using a 7Fr guiding catheter. Measurement of FFR wa successful in 115 of 122 patients (94%). No complications related to the use of the 4Fr catheter occurred. Repeatability was determined from 108 repeated measurements: the intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.942 and the mean difference between repeated FFR measurements was −0.001 ± 0.038. Reliability was determined from 15 unselected patients; there was no systematic error and only 1 value was out of the range of 2 SDs of the mean difference. Using a threshold value of 0.75, the Kappa coefficient for the qualitative agreement was 0.84. Thus, pressure-derived FFR assessment can safely be performed through 4Fr diagnostic catheters, with similar repeatability and reliability as 7Fr guiding catheters, resulting in a simplification of the measurement procedure.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to American Journal of Cardiology
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • De Bruyne B.
        • Pijls N.H.
        • Paulus W.J.
        • Vantrimpont P.J.
        • Sys S.U.
        • Heyndrickx G.R.
        Transstenotic coronary pressure gradient measurement in humans.
        J Am Coll Cardiol. 1993; 22: 119-126
        • Pijls N.H.
        • Kern M.J.
        • Yock P.G.
        • De Bruyne B.
        Practice and potential pitfalls of coronary pressure measurement.
        Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2000; 49: 1-16
        • De Bruyne B.
        • Bartunek J.
        • Sys S.U.
        • Pijls N.H.
        • Heyndrickx G.R.
        • Wijns W.
        Simultaneous coronary pressure and flow velocity measurements in humans. Feasibility, reproducibility, and hemodynamic dependence of coronary flow velocity reserve, hyperemic flow versus pressure slope index, and fractional flow reserve.
        Circulation. 1996; 94: 1842-1849
        • De Bruyne B.
        • Pijls N.H.
        • Heyndrickx G.R.
        • Hodeige D.
        • Kirkeeide R.
        • Gould K.L.
        Pressure-derived fractional flow reserve to assess serial epicardial stenoses.
        Circulation. 2000; 101: 1840-1847
        • Ferrari M.
        • Schnell B.
        • Werner G.S.
        • Figulla H.R.
        Safety of deferring angioplasty in patients with normal coronary flow velocity reserve.
        J Am Coll Cardiol. 1999; 33: 82-87
        • Bech G.J.
        • De Bruyne B.
        • Bonnier H.J.
        • Bartunek J.
        • Wijns W.
        • Peels K.
        • Heyndrickx G.R.
        • Koolen J.J.
        • Pijls N.H.
        Long-term follow-up after deferral of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty of intermediate stenosis on the basis of coronary pressure measurement.
        J Am Coll Cardiol. 1998; 31: 841-847
        • Kern M.J.
        • Donohue T.J.
        • Aguirre F.V.
        • Bach R.G.
        • Caracciolo E.A.
        • Wolford T.
        • Mechem C.J.
        • Flynn M.S.
        • Chaitman B.
        Clinical outcome of deferring angioplasty in patients with normal translesional pressure-flow velocity measurements.
        J Am Coll Cardiol. 1995; 25: 178-187
        • Skillman J.J.
        • Kim D.
        • Baim D.S.
        Vascular complications of percutaneous femoral cardiac interventions. Incidence and operative repair.
        Arch Surg. 1988; 123: 1207-1212
        • Kim D.
        • Orron D.E.
        • Skillman J.J.
        • Kent K.C.
        • Porter D.H.
        • Schlam B.W.
        • Carrozza J.
        • Reis G.J.
        • Baim D.S.
        Role of superficial femoral artery puncture in the development of pseudoaneurysm and arteriovenous fistula complicating percutaneous transfemoral cardiac catheterization.
        Cathet Cardiovasc Diagn. 1992; 25: 91-97
      1. British Standards Institution. Precision of test methods I. Guide for the determination and reproducibility for a standard test method. (BS 5497, part I). London: BSI, 1979

        • Bland J.M.
        • Altman D.G.
        Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement.
        Lancet. 1986; 1: 307-310
        • Bech G.J.
        • De Bruyne B.
        • Pijls N.H.
        • de Muinck E.D.
        • Hoorntje J.C.
        • Escaned J.
        • Stella P.R.
        • Boersma E.
        • Bartunek J.
        • Koolen J.J.
        • Wijns W.
        Fractional flow reserve to determine the appropriateness of angioplasty in moderate coronary stenosis.
        Circulation. 2001; 103: 2928-2934
        • Metz D.
        • Chapoutot L.
        • Brasselet C.
        • Jolly D.
        Randomized evaluation of four versus five French catheters for transfemoral coronary angiography.
        Clin Cardiol. 1999; 22: 29-32
        • Lefevre T.
        • Morice M.C.
        • Bonan R.
        • Dumas P.
        • Louvard Y.
        • Karrillon G.
        • Loubeyre C.
        • Piechaud J.F.
        Coronary angiography using 4 or 6 French diagnostic catheters.
        J Invasive Cardiol. 2001; 13: 674-677
        • Talley J.D.
        • Mauldin P.D.
        • Kupersmith J.
        Economic and angiographic factors in determining optimal catheter size in performing outpatient left-sided heart and coronary angiography.
        Am J Cardiol. 1996; 77: 374-378
        • Chahoud G.
        • Khoukaz S.
        • El-Shafei A.
        • Azrak E.
        • Bitar S.
        • Kern M.J.
        Randomized comparison of coronary angiography using 4F catheters.
        Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2001; 53: 221-224
        • Schobel W.A.
        • Spyridopoulos I.
        • Hoffmeister H.M.
        • Seipel L.
        Percutaneous coronary interventions using a new 5 French guiding catheter.
        Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2001; 53: 308-312
        • Waksman R.
        • King III, S.B.
        • Douglas J.S.
        • Shen Y.
        • Ewing H.
        • Mueller L.
        • Ghazzal Z.M.
        • Weintraub W.S.
        Predictors of groin complications after balloon and new-device coronary intervention.
        Am J Cardiol. 1995; 75: 886-889