Visual-Functional Mismatch Between Coronary Angiography, Fractional Flow Reserve, and Quantitative Coronary Angiography

Abstract

Anatomical and functional mismatches are not uncommon in the assessment of coronary lesions. The aim of this study was to identify clinical and lesion-specific factors affecting angiographic, anatomical, and functional mismatch in intermediate coronary lesions. In patients who underwent coronary angiography for clinical reasons, fractional flow reserve (FFR), and quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) analyses for intermediate stenotic lesions were performed simultaneously. Mismatches between the measured values were analyzed. A total of 95 intermediate lesions were assessed simultaneously by visual angiography, FFR, and QCA. The visual-FFR mismatch was found in 40% of the lesions while reverse visual-FFR mismatch was determined in nearly 14% of the lesions. Mismatch and reverse mismatch between FFR and QCA parameters were observed in 10 and 23% of the lesions. FFR value was significant in 32% of the lesions while visually significant stenosis was shown in 61% of the lesions. Among the visual-FFR reverse mismatch group, the prevalence of culprit lesions within the left anterior descending (LAD) was significantly higher than other vessels (p value < 0.02). There were high frequencies of angiographic, QCA, and functional mismatches in analyses of intermediate coronary lesions. LAD lesions showed the highest mismatch. Angiographic or QCA estimation of lesion severity has consistently resulted in inappropriate stenting of functionally nonsignificant lesions or undertreatment of significant lesions based on FFR.

Keywords: FFR; QCA; angiography; coronary imaging; coronary intervention; ischemia; stenosis.

Figures

Fig. 1

Correlation between FFR and MLD. FFR, fractional flow reserve; MLD; minimum luminal diameter.

Fig. 2

Correlation between FFR and REFD. FFR, fractional flow reserve; REFD, reference diameter.