REC: Interventional Cardiology (English Ed.) (Feb 2019)

Quantitative flow ratio in myocardial infarction for the evaluation of non-infarct-related arteries. The QIMERA pilot study

  • Carlos Cortés,
  • Tania Rodríguez-Gabella,
  • Hipólito Gutiérrez,
  • Roman Arnold,
  • Ana María Serrador,
  • Benigno Ramos,
  • Pablo Catalá,
  • Álvaro Aparisi,
  • Williams Hinojosa,
  • Itziar Gómez,
  • Manuel Carrasco Moraleja,
  • Juan Luis Gutiérrez-Chico,
  • José A. San Román,
  • Ignacio J. Amat-Santos

DOI
https://doi.org/10.24875/RECICE.M19000007
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 1, no. 1
pp. 13 – 20

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Introduction and objectives: Complete revascularization is recommended for the management of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarctions (STEMI). Although physiological evaluation is recommended for the assessment of nonculprit lesions, in this context, the use of fractional flow reserve (FFR) is limited. The quantitative flow ratio (QFR) is a new angiography-based tool for the assessment of functional severity. We evaluated the functional changes occurring in nonculprit lesions after the acute phase and the QFR/FFR correlation in non-infarct-related arteries. Methods: We recruited all patients with multivessel disease admitted to our institution due to STEMI from January 2016 through December 2017 who underwent staged interventions for the management of nonculprit lesions. We conducted a retrospective QFR assessment at both the index and the staged procedures and drew a comparison. Also, the QFR/FFR concordance and agreement were prospectively evaluated between January and May 2018 in a cohort of patients with STEMI and multivessel disease. Results: We analyzed a total of 131 lesions in 88 patients. During the initial procedure, 93.1% of the lesions were considered significant based on the angiography compared to only 56.3% studied through QFR (P ≤ .001). The QFR reassessment during the staged intervention brought this percentage down to 32.1%. All patients with QFR values ≥ 0.82 during the index procedure remained nonsignificant at the staged assessment. Both the FFR and the QFR were compared in 12 patients showing good agreement and a mean difference of 0.015 ± 0.02 (P > .1). Conclusions: The QFR-based physiological assessment of nonculprit lesions in STEMI patients led us to consider nonsignificant 40% of the lesions classified as significant by the angiography. Also, the QFR significantly increased from the acute phase to the staged procedure, indicative that in patients with QFR ≥ 0.82 in the acute phase a new coronary angiography procedure may be unnecessary.

Keywords