Visual–functional mismatch between coronary angiography
and fractional flow reserve
(FFR) has been reported, and the underlying reason remains poorly understood. Therefore, the relationship between angiographic measurements and FFR was evaluated, and predictors for FFR in intermediate coronary artery stenosis were determined.
Consecutive 314 patients (405 lesions) with a lesion of 30–80% angiographic diameter stenosis who underwent invasive FFR were recruited. The myocardial area supplied by the coronary artery distal to the stenosis was evaluated using a modified version of the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI) score. Participants underwent follow-up, and major cardiovascular events (MACE), including all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), and unplanned revascularization were recorded.
Although % diameter stenosis was correlated with FFR (R
= 0.279, P
< 0.001), diameter stenosis-FFR mismatch was observed in 37.8% of the lesions. Although FFR values were not associated with clinical factors, such as age, sex, and comorbidities, it was correlated with minimal lumen diameter (MLD), diffuse lesion, presence of proximal lesion, and BARI score. In addition, the lesions in left anterior descending (LAD) coronary artery showed low FFR values compared with those in the left circumflex coronary artery or right coronary artery. In multivariate logistic analysis, MLD (β coefficient = 0.330), diffuse lesion (β coefficient = –0.266), proximal lesion (β coefficient = –0.144), BARI score (β coefficient = –0.219), and LAD lesion (β coefficient = –0.293) were all independent predictors for FFR value. The estimated FFR value based on these factors showed smaller mismatch and higher sensitivity. No difference was observed in the event rates for MACE and MI or revascularization between the FFR-guided and estimated FFR-guided strategies.
MLD, diffuse lesion, proximal lesion, BARI score, and lesion vessel were independent predictors for FFR in intermediate coronary stenosis. Not only the extent of local lesion stenosis but also the amount of myocardial supply and the lesion location may determine the physiological significance and explain the visual–functional mismatch. The estimation of FFR by these factors may be useful in clinical practice.