Additional Value of Optical Coherence Tomography-Derived Virtual Flow Reserve for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Guidance.

Andrea Marrone, Andrea Erriquez, Filippo Maria Verardi, Iginio Colaiori, Marta Cocco, Serena Caglioni, Carlo Tumscitz, Carlo Penzo, Federico Marchini, Jennifer Meinen, JoAnna McNutt, Jorn Op den Buijs, Wei Che Chiu, Francesco Versaci, Gianluca Campo, Simone Biscaglia
{"title":"Additional Value of Optical Coherence Tomography-Derived Virtual Flow Reserve for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Guidance.","authors":"Andrea Marrone, Andrea Erriquez, Filippo Maria Verardi, Iginio Colaiori, Marta Cocco, Serena Caglioni, Carlo Tumscitz, Carlo Penzo, Federico Marchini, Jennifer Meinen, JoAnna McNutt, Jorn Op den Buijs, Wei Che Chiu, Francesco Versaci, Gianluca Campo, Simone Biscaglia","doi":"10.1002/ccd.70207","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The combination of imaging and physiology could provide the best guidance for complex and high-risk interventional procedures (CHIP).</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>The objective of the present study is to evaluate the difference in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) planning in CHIP patients between angiography, angiography-derived fractional flow reserve (FFR), and the combination of imaging and physiology by means of optical coherence tomography plus virtual flow reserve (OCT-VFR). Secondary objectives were to evaluate disease pattern, virtual stent length, and RVD according to the different plans.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Among patients included in the AQVA-I and II trials, we selected those receiving OCT (n = 114). Physiology reconstruction based on OCT traces was obtained in 97 patients. One operator, blinded to the actual procedural plan and to post-PCI result, planned the procedure according to angiography, angiography-derived FFR, OCT, and OCT-VFR.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>OCT-VFR plan was different compared to angiography and angiography-derived FFR plans in 48% and 30% of the cases, respectively. OCT-VFR plan was also different from OCT plans in 25% of the cases, mainly because of a different disease pattern leading to shorter treatment. Pattern of disease was more frequently focal in the angiography-derived FFR plan if compared to OCT-VFR plan (p < 0.01). Stent length was different across different plans (p for trend < 0.001) with angiography-derived FFR with the shortest and OCT with the longest, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>OCT-VFR provided a different PCI plan than both angiography and angiography-derived FFR in more than one-third of the cases. If compared to OCT alone, the OCT-VFR plan was significantly shorter in terms of stent length.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05658952, NCT04664140.</p>","PeriodicalId":520583,"journal":{"name":"Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.70207","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The combination of imaging and physiology could provide the best guidance for complex and high-risk interventional procedures (CHIP).

Aims: The objective of the present study is to evaluate the difference in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) planning in CHIP patients between angiography, angiography-derived fractional flow reserve (FFR), and the combination of imaging and physiology by means of optical coherence tomography plus virtual flow reserve (OCT-VFR). Secondary objectives were to evaluate disease pattern, virtual stent length, and RVD according to the different plans.

Methods: Among patients included in the AQVA-I and II trials, we selected those receiving OCT (n = 114). Physiology reconstruction based on OCT traces was obtained in 97 patients. One operator, blinded to the actual procedural plan and to post-PCI result, planned the procedure according to angiography, angiography-derived FFR, OCT, and OCT-VFR.

Results: OCT-VFR plan was different compared to angiography and angiography-derived FFR plans in 48% and 30% of the cases, respectively. OCT-VFR plan was also different from OCT plans in 25% of the cases, mainly because of a different disease pattern leading to shorter treatment. Pattern of disease was more frequently focal in the angiography-derived FFR plan if compared to OCT-VFR plan (p < 0.01). Stent length was different across different plans (p for trend < 0.001) with angiography-derived FFR with the shortest and OCT with the longest, respectively.

Conclusions: OCT-VFR provided a different PCI plan than both angiography and angiography-derived FFR in more than one-third of the cases. If compared to OCT alone, the OCT-VFR plan was significantly shorter in terms of stent length.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05658952, NCT04664140.

光学相干层析衍生的虚拟血流储备在经皮冠状动脉介入治疗指导中的附加价值。
背景:影像与生理结合可为复杂、高危介入手术(CHIP)提供最佳指导。目的:本研究的目的是评估血管造影、血管造影衍生的分流血流储备(FFR)以及光学相干断层扫描加虚拟血流储备(OCT-VFR)成像与生理相结合在CHIP患者经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)计划中的差异。次要目的是根据不同的方案评估疾病类型、虚拟支架长度和RVD。方法:在AQVA-I和II试验中,我们选择接受OCT治疗的患者(n = 114)。对97例患者进行了基于OCT的生理重建。一名操作者对实际手术计划和pci后结果不知情,根据血管造影、血管造影衍生的FFR、OCT和OCT- vfr计划手术。结果:OCT-VFR计划与血管造影和血管造影衍生的FFR计划相比,分别有48%和30%的病例存在差异。OCT- vfr计划也有25%的病例与OCT计划不同,主要是因为不同的疾病模式导致治疗时间更短。结论:在超过三分之一的病例中,OCT-VFR提供的PCI方案与血管造影和血管造影衍生的FFR方案不同。如果与单独的OCT相比,OCT- vfr计划在支架长度方面显着缩短。试验注册:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05658952, NCT04664140。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信