End-Diastolic Fractional Flow Reserve
Comparison With Conventional Full-Cardiac Cycle Fractional Flow Reserve
Background—Diastolic fractional flow reserve (dFFR) has been shown to be highly sensitive for detection of inducible myocardial ischemia. However, its reliance on measurement of left-ventricular pressure for zero-flow pressure correction, as well as manual extraction of the diastolic interval, has been its major limitation. Given previous reports of minimal zero-flow pressure at end-diastole, we compared instantaneous ECG-gated end-diastolic FFR with conventional full-cardiac cycle FFR and other diastolic indices in the porcine model.
Methods and Results—Measurements of FFR in the left anterior descending and left circumflex arteries were performed in an open-chest swine model with an external occluder device on the coronary artery used to produce varying degrees of epicardial stenosis. An ultrasound flow-probe that was placed proximal to the occluder measured absolute blood flow in ml/min, and it was used as a gold standard for FFR measurement. A total of 17 measurements at maximal hyperemia were acquired in 5 animals. Correlation coefficient between conventional mean hyperemic FFR with pressure-wire and directly measured FFR with flow-probe was 0.876 (standard error estimate=0.069; P<0.0001). The hyperemic end-diastolic FFR with pressure-wire correlated better with FFR measured directly with flow-probe (r=0.941, standard error estimate=0.050; P<0.0001).
Conclusions—Instantaneous hyperemic ECG-gated FFR acquired at end-diastole, as compared with conventional full-cardiac cycle FFR, has an improved correlation with FFR measured directly with ultrasound flow-probe.
- constriction, pathologic
- coronary artery disease
- fractional flow reserve, myocardial
- Received February 11, 2013.
- Accepted January 12, 2014.
- © 2014 American Heart Association, Inc.