One-Dimensional Mathematical Model-Based Automated Assessment of Fractional Flow Reserve in a Patient with Silent Myocardial Ischemia

Daria Gognieva, Timur Gamilov, Roman Pryamonosov, Vladimir Betelin, Sergey K Ternovoy, Natalya S Serova, Sergej Abugov, Dmitry Shchekochikhin, Yulia Mitina, Houssem El-Manaa, Philippe Kopylov, Daria Gognieva, Timur Gamilov, Roman Pryamonosov, Vladimir Betelin, Sergey K Ternovoy, Natalya S Serova, Sergej Abugov, Dmitry Shchekochikhin, Yulia Mitina, Houssem El-Manaa, Philippe Kopylov

Abstract

BACKGROUND Noninvasive assessment of the fractional flow reserve (FFR) in patients with coronary artery disease plays an important role in determining the need for revascularization. It is particularly relevant for patients with a borderline stenoses and painless myocardial ischemia. Our article describes the first clinical experience in the Russian Federation of using an automated method of noninvasive assessment of the fractional flow reserve (FFRct) with a one-dimensional (1-D) mathematical model in a patient with painless myocardial ischemia. CASE REPORT A 58-year-old male patient who underwent stent implantation in the left circumflex coronary artery (LCX) due to an acute non-ST-elevation posterior myocardial infarction had borderline stenoses of the left anterior descending artery (LAD). After stent implantation, there were no relapse angina symptoms on drug treatment, and according to our examination guideline for patients with borderline stenoses, a treadmill test was performed. The test was positive; therefore, FFR assessment was recommended, with coronary multi-slice CT being performed. The following results were obtained: FFRct LAD - 0.57; FFRct LCX - 0.88. An invasive assessment of FFR was also performed as a reference standard and revealed: FFR LAD - 0.6; FFR LCX - 0.88, and simultaneously a LAD percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) was performed. Three months later, the patient underwent a stress test, which revealed no evidence of induced ischemia. CONCLUSIONS Our method of noninvasive assessment of FFR has shown encouraging results, but we believe that larger-scale studies are needed to establish it as common clinical practice.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of interest: None declared

Conflict of interest

None.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
The source image in a DICOM format, where the visibility scope is narrowed in the upper cross-section. DICOM image had a resolution of 512×512×160 voxels, and voxel spatial size (spacing) was 0.5×0.5×1.0 mm.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
3-D regions of the aorta and coronary vessels. RCA – the right coronary artery; LAD –the left anterior descending artery; LCX – the left circumflex coronary artery; S1,2 – stenosis 1 and 2.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
A. One-dimensional mathematical model of coronary blood flow: FFRct LAD – 0.57; FFRct LCX – 0.88. B. Invasive assessment values: FFR LAD – 0.6; FFR LCX – 0.88.
Figure 4.
Figure 4.
An invasive assessment of FFR after stent implantation: FFR LAD – 0.86.

References

    1. Gamilov TM, Kopylov FY, Pryamonosov RA, Simakov SS. Virtual fractional flow reserve assessment in patient-specific coronary networks by 1D hemodynamic model. Russ J Numer Anal Math Modelling. 2015;30(5):269–76.
    1. Gamilov TM, Kopylov FY, Simakov SS. Computational simulations of fractional flow reserve variability. In: Karasözen B, Manguoğlu M, Tezer-Sezgin M, et al., editors. Lecture Notes in Computational Science and Engineering Numerical Mathematics and Advanced Applications ENUMATH 2015. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing; 2016. pp. 499–507.
    1. Bessonov N, Sequeira A, Simakov S, et al. Methods of blood flow modeling [published erratum appears in Math Model Nat Phenom, 2016; 11(1): 91] Math Model Nat Phenom. 2016;11(1):1–25.
    1. Boileau E, Nithiarasu P. One-dimensional modelling of the coronary circulation. application to noninvasive quantification of fractional flow reserve (FFR). In: Tavares JMR, Natal Jorge RM, editors. Computational and experimental biomedical sciences: Methods and applications. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing; 2015. pp. 137–55.
    1. Simakov SS, Gamilov TM, Kopylov FY, Vasilevsky YV. Evaluation of the hemodynamic significance of stenosis in multiple involvements of the coronary vessels by mathematical simulation. Bull Exp Biol Med. 2016;162(01):111–14.
    1. Danilov A, Ivanov Y, Pryamonosov R, Vassilevski Y. Methods of graph network reconstruction in personalized medicine. Int J Numer Method Biomed Eng. 2016;32(8)
    1. Koo BK, Erglis A, Doh JH, et al. Diagnosis of ischemia-causing coronary stenoses by noninvasive fractional flow reserve computed from coronary computed tomographic angiograms. Results from the prospective multicenter DISCOVER-FLOW (Diagnosis of Ischemia-Causing Stenoses Obtained Via Noninvasive Fractional Flow Reserve) study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;58(19):1989–97.
    1. Min JK, Leipsic J, Pencina MJ, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of fractional flow reserve from anatomic CT angiography. JAMA. 2012;308(12):1237–45.
    1. Nørgaard BL, Leipsic J, Gaur S, et al. Diagnostic performance of noninvasive fractional flow reserve derived from coronary computed tomography angiography in suspected coronary artery disease. The NXT trial (analysis of coronary blood flow using ct angiography: next steps) J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;63(12):1145–55.
    1. Hultena E, Ahmadi A, Blankstein R. CT assessment of myocardial perfusion and fractional flow reserve. Prog Cardiovasc Dis. 2015;57(6):623–63.
    1. Min JK, Koo BK, Erglis A, et al. Usefulness of noninvasive fractional flow reserve computed from coronary computed tomographic angiograms for intermediate stenoses confirmed by quantitative coronary angiography. Am J Cardiol. 2012;110(7):971–76.
    1. Grunau GL, Min JK, Leipsic J. Modeling of fractional flow reserve based on coronary CT angiography. Curr Cardiol Rep. 2013;15(1):336.
    1. Morris PD, vd Vosse FN, Lawford PV, et al. “Virtual” (computed) fractional flow reserve. Current challenges and limitations. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;8(8):1009–17.

Source: PubMed

3
Tilaa