Bologna 21 Aprile 2011 TAVOLA ROTONDA Quale Ruolo Clinico e Quale Rimborso per la Franctional Flow Reserve? Correlazioni anatomo-funzionali FFR vs IVUS Luigi Vignali, Parma IVUS guidance in PCI Indications When IVUS? Why IVUS? Pre PCI Decide strategy and Sizing Vessel reference and % stenosis Length of the lession Plaque composition Post PCI Evaluate Stent Results Final lumen Expansion Apposition Dissection or plaque shift IVUS in evaluation for Post dilatation needs Pre Stent Mal apposition Stent Under expansion •Post-dilatation strategy: •With non-compliant balloon shorter than stent in presence of vessel remodelling or uncompletedapposition IVUS reveals need of postdilatation Posdil Recommendations for specific percutaneous coronary intervention devices IVUS-guided stent implantation may be considered for unprotected left main PCI CLASS IIb EVIDENCE C IVUS in ISR Beware that expected ISR might reveal under expanded stent during previous intervention. Because the vessel and plaque and stents became visible, IVUS guidance clarify substrate in failure or previous PCI, and frequently discover under expanded stents IVUS reveals stent underexpansion in ISR Performance Comparison, OCT vs IVUS C7XR IVUS Spazial Resolution Acquisition Time Tissue Penetration 12 - 15 mm 20 mm/s 1.0 - 2.0 mm 100 - 200 mm 0.5 - 1 mm/s 10 mm Contrast enjection during acquisition Every images No contrast Image Comparison • Edge dissection ??? ??? 10 during stent implantation Neointimal growth on previously implanted stent at follow-up Validation of IVUS Assessment of Ischemia-producing Stenoses (Doppler FloWire, SPECT, and Pressure Wire) IVUS MLA 4.0mm2 IVUS MLA <4.0mm2 CFR < 2.0 2 27 CFR 2.0 39 4 Diagnostic accuracy = 92%. Abizaid et al. Am J Cardiol 1998;82:42-8 + Spect - Spect IVUS MLA 4.0mm2 IVUS MLA <4.0mm2 4 42 20 1 Diagnostic accuracy = 93%. Nishioka et al. J Am Coll Cardiol 1999;33:1870-8 Takagi, et al. Circulation 1999;100:250-5 IVUS in intermediate assessment Proximal LAD, CX, RCA Intermediate stenosis assessment: Takagi, et al. Circulation 1999;100:250-5 If in Proximal LAD, CC or RCA, the stenosis MLA ≤ 4 mm2 then is cause isquemia; and must be treated IVUS reveals significance of intermediate lesions, with morphological assessment Clinical follow-up in 357 Intermediate Lesions in 300 Pts with Deferred Intervention after IVUS Imaging IVUS MLD (mm) Death/MI/TLR DM 4 3 2 35 35 30 30 25 25 20 20 15 15 10 10 5 5 2-3 3-4 4-5 5 0 IVUS MLA (mm2) 2-3 3-4 4-5 5 0 IVUS MLA (mm2) 1 r=0.339 0 0 • • • • TLR 1 2 3 QCA MLD (mm) 4 no-DM Death/MI/TLR @ (mean) 13 mos = 8% overall (2% death/MI and 6% TLR) Death/MI/TLR @ (mean) 13 mos = 4.4% in lesions with MLA >4.0mm2 Only independent predictor of death/MI/TLR was IVUS MLA (p=0.0041) Independent predictors of TLR were DM (p=0.0493) and IVUS MLA (p=0.0042) Abizaid et al. Circulation 1999;100:256-61 In Intermediate stenosis assessment: Event Free Survival is better for the IVUS Criteria vs. the FFR >0.75 Criteria. Confidential information of Boston Scientific Corporation. Do not copy or distribute. Follow-up of 122 patients with moderate LEFT MAIN disease Indipendent predictors of MACE @11.7 Months:DM (p=0.004) and IVUS MLD (p=0.005)- but NOT the palque burden Abizaid, et al. J Am Coll Cardiol 1999;34:707-715 IVUS in intermediate assessment in Left Main Intermediate Main Left stenosis assessment: If Main Left MLA ≤ 6 mm2 cause isquemia and must be treated Abizaid, et al. J Am Coll Cardiol 1999;34:707-715 IVUS assess significance of Main Left lesions, where angio fails IVUS determinants of LMCA FFR<0.75 Jasti et al Circulation 2004; 110;2831-6 MULTICENTERDED LITRO STUDY INTERMEDIATE LEFT MAIN CORONARY ARTERY LESION Kaplan-Meier survival free from mortality and infarction Cumulative proportion surviving 100 DEF 98.1% 75 REV 93.4% Logrank test: p = 0.04 50 179 pt MLA>6 mm2 (DEF group) 25 331 Patients 152 pt MLA<6 mm2 (REV group) 0 0 Jose’ M de la torre Hernandez et al.JACC 2010;vol55 12 Months PCI 44% CABG 55% 24 IVUS Criteria for a “significant” LMCA stenosis Absolute lumen CSA <5.9 mm2 (or MLD < 2.8 mm) is the suggested criterion for significant LMCA stenosis LA= 5,5 LA= 4,5 LA= 8,0 FFR= 0,70 FFR vs IVUS in Intermediate Coronary Lesions 167 consecutive patients (FFR-guided,83 lesion vs IVUS-guided,94 lesion) 75 91.5% 50 25 33,7% 100 Event Free Survaival (%) 100 90 80 P>0.05 70 60 0 FFR guided IVUS guided The rate of performing PCI according to guiding device Cutoff value FFR 0.80 100 200 Time to event (days) Cutoff value IVUS MLA >4mm2 Chang-Wook Nam et al 2010;JACC interventions vol 3 :812-7 300 400 CORRELATION BETWEEN FFR AND IVUS LUMEN AREA IN 150 INTERMEDIATE CORONARY STENOSIS For lesion with vessel reference diameters of 2.5-3 mm, 3-3.5 mm and >3.5 mm, the MLA threshold for FFR <0.8 were 2.5,2.8 and 3.7 mm2 respectively Itsik Ben-Dior, Ron Waksman et al 2011.JACC FFR= 0,74 COMPLEMENTARY ROLE IVUS FFR OCT PRE INTERVENTION IVUS vessel size FFR Severity lesion POST INTERVENTION IVUS lesion lenght Expansion Apposition Coverage Complication Underexpansion Edge problems OCT INDICATION Immediatelly after stent implantation 1 Year after DES Implantation 1 Year after BMS Implantation Delayed healing; new intimal growth Thank you for your attention For any correspondence: gbiondizoccai@gmail.com For these and further slides on these topics feel free to visit the metcardio.org website: http://www.metcardio.org/slides.html