Dataset Information

Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio Measurement During Intracranial Submaximal Angioplasty: Case Series and 2-Dimensional Operative Video.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Instantaneous wave-free ratios (iFRs) are functional measures of arterial stenosis that have become essential to interventional cardiology procedures. Their use for intracranial submaximal angioplasty (angioplasty with an undersized balloon) has not been studied extensively.

Objective

To describe the feasibility and technique of iFR measurement for stenosis assessment during intracranial angioplasty.

Methods

We present a series of consecutive patients treated between January 1, 2017 and June 30, 2018 with submaximal intracranial angioplasty in whom pre- and postprocedure iFR measurements were obtained with a Verrata-Volcano pressure wire (Philips, Amsterdam, The Netherlands). We collected patient data on age, sex, comorbid conditions, presenting complaints, modified Rankin scale (mRS) score at admission, neurological findings, procedure duration, fluoroscopy time, intraprocedural complications, length of hospital stay, and mRS score at last clinical follow-up (favorable outcome, 0-2). Angiographic stenosis severity and iFR values were recorded before and after angioplasty.

Results

A total of 12 patients underwent iFR-guided angioplasty during the study period. The median patient age was 69.5 yr (range 48-81 yr). All patients had symptomatic intracranial arterial stenosis (3-basilar, 2-vertebral, 6-middle cerebral, 1-internal carotid). Preangioplasty stenosis ranged from 55% to 90%. The median postangioplasty reduction in stenosis was 17% (range 9%-30%). Preangioplasty values ranged from 0.30 to 0.40 (n = 4). Postangioplasty values ranged from 0.6 to 0.9 (n = 5). iFR values improved considerably in all patients. No procedure-related complications occurred. The median follow-up was 8.9 mo (range 3-25 mo). Follow-up outcomes were favorable in 10 patients.

Conclusion

iFR measurement before and after intracranial angioplasty is feasible. It may be used to assess the adequacy of intracranial angioplasty.

SUBMITTER: Vakharia K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7490221 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background Quantitative flow ratio ( QFR ) has a high diagnostic accuracy in assessing functional stenoses relevance, as judged by fractional flow reserve ( FFR ). However, its diagnostic performance has not been thoroughly evaluated using instantaneous wave-free ratio ( iFR ) or coronary flow reserve as the reference standard. This study sought to evaluate the diagnostic performance of QFR using other reference standards beyond FFR . Methods and Results We analyzed 182 patients (253 vessels) with stable ischemic heart disease and 82 patients (105 nonculprit vessels) with acute myocardial infarction in whom coronary stenoses were assessed with FFR , iFR, and coronary flow reserve. Contrast QFR analysis of interrogated vessels was performed in blinded fashion by a core laboratory, and its diagnostic performance was evaluated with respect to the other invasive physiological indices. Mean percentage diameter stenosis, FFR , iFR , coronary flow reserve, and QFR were 53.1±19.0%, 0.80±0.13, 0.88±0.12, 3.14±1.30, and 0.81±0.14, respectively. QFR showed higher correlation ( r=0.863 with FFR versus 0.740 with iFR , P<0.001), diagnostic accuracy (90.8% versus 81.3%, P<0.001), and discriminant function (area under the curve=0.953 versus 0.880, P<0.001) when FFR was used as a reference standard than when iFR was used as the reference standard. However, when coronary flow reserve was used as an independent reference standard, FFR , iFR , and QFR showed modest discriminant function (area under the curve=0.682, 0.765, and 0.677, respectively) and there were no significant differences in diagnostic accuracy among FFR , iFR , and QFR (65.4%, 70.6%, and 64.9%; all P values in pairwise comparisons >0.05, overall comparison P=0.061). Conclusions QFR has a high correlation and agreement with respect to both FFR and iFR , although it is better when FFR is used as the comparator. As a pressure-derived index not depending on wire or adenosine, QFR might be a promising tool for improving the adoption rate of physiology-based revascularization in clinical practice.