Application of intravascular physiology methods in clinical practice: two-year data from the Russian registry

Aim. To analyze the use in clinical practice of intravascular coronary assessment methods based on two-year data from the Russian Registry on the Use of Intravascular Imaging and Physiology.

Material and methods. Since 2021, the Russian Registry on the Use of Intravascular Imaging and Physiology has included data from 7967 studies in 3932 patients, of which 3086 (38,7%) were studies of intravascular physiology. In 2021, 13 branches from 9 cities participated in the registry, in 2022 — 20 branches from 11 cities. For chronic coronary artery disease, 2484 (80,5%) studies were performed, for acute coronary syndrome (ACS) — 598 (19,4%).

Results. In 2022, the registry included 1,9 times more intravascular functional studies compared to 2021. The contribution of different clinics was uneven — 75,7% of studies were performed in three departments. The use of non-hyperemic indexes prevailed over hyperemic ones (58%), and in ACS they were used three times more often. All coronary arteries were examined, most often the anterior descending artery. As a primary diagnosis, 1968 (63,8%) studies were performed, while for the purpose of dynamic control — 122 (3,9%), at the surgical stage — 996 (32,3%). In 85,5% (n=2638) of observations, the functional assessment of stenosis hemodynamic significance directly influenced the treatment tactics.

Conclusion. The registry data indicate the significant role of functional methods among intravascular diagnostic options in the practice of domestic clinics participating in the registry. The registry demonstrated their use as a primary diagnosis 2 times more often than for coronary artery stenting. Some indications for the active use of intravascular physiology methods (in acute coronary syndrome, left coronary artery involvement) are currently controversial and require further research.

1. Alekyan BG, Grigoryan AM, Staferov AV, et al. Endovascular diagnostics and treatment in the Russian Federation. Russ J of Endovascular Surgery. 2022;9,(Special Issue):5-67. (In Russ.) doi:10.24183/2409-4080-2022-9S-S254.

2. Escaned J, Ryan N, Mejía-Rentería H, et al. Safety of the Deferral of Coronary Revascularization on the Basis of Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio and Fractional Flow Reserve Measurements in Stable Coronary Artery Disease and Acute Coronary Syndromes.JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2018;11(15):1437-49. doi:10.1016/j.jcin.2018.05.029.

3. Gelman A, Carlin JB, Nallamothu BK. Objective Randomised Blinded Investigation With Optimal Medical Therapy of Angioplasty in Stable Angina (ORBITA) and coronary stents: A case study in the analysis and reporting of clinical trials. Am Heart J. 2019;214:54-9. doi:10.1016/j.ahj.2019.04.011.

4. Neumann FJ, Sousa-Uva M, Ahlsson A, et al.; ESC Scientific Document Group. 2018 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization. Eur Heart J. 2019;40(2):87-165. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehy394.

5. Wang TD. Considering ISCHEMIA in the Context of FAME and FAME 2: A Call for the Universal Adoption of Invasive Ischemia-Guided Coronary Intervention Approach in Chronic Coronary Syndrome. Acta Cardiol Sin. 2020;36(2):93-6. doi:10.6515/ACS.202003_36(2).20200303A.

6. Demin VV, Babunashvili AM, Shugushev ZKh, et al. The Russian Registry of the use of Intravascular Methods of Imaging and Physiology: the First-year Results. J Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology. 2022;16(3):27-39. (In Russ.) doi:10.25512/DIR.2022.16.3.03.

7. Götberg M, Berntorp K, Rylance R, et al. 5-Year Outcomes of PCI Guided by Measurement of Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio Versus Fractional Flow Reserve. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2022;79(10):965-74. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2021.12.030.

8. Modi BN, van de Hoef TP, Piek JJ, Perera D. Physiological assessment of left main coronary artery disease. EuroIntervention. 2017;13(7):820-7. doi:10.4244/EIJ-D-17-00135.391.

9. Hunter GW, Sharma V, Varma C, Connolly D. The EXCEL Trial: The Interventionalists' Perspective. Eur Cardiol. 2021;16:e01. doi:10.15420/ecr.2020.32.

10. Holm NR, Mäkikallio T, Lindsay MM, et al. NOBLE investigators. Percutaneous coronary angioplasty versus coronary artery bypass grafting in the treatment of unprotected left main stenosis: updated 5-year outcomes from the randomised, non-inferiority NOBLE trial. Lancet. 2020;395(10219):191-9. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(19)32972-1.

11. Sacha J, Lipski P, Feusette P. Angiographic co-registration of instantaneous wave-free ratio and intravascular ultrasound improves functional assessment of borderline lesions in the coronary artery. Postepy Kardiol Interwencyjnej. 2018;14(1):107-8. doi:10.5114/aic.2018.74366.

12. Ono M, Serruys PW, Patel MR, et al. A prospective multicenter validation study for a novel angiography-derived physiological assessment software: Rationale and design of the radiographic imaging validation and evaluation for Angio-МРК (ReVEAL МРК) study. Am Heart J. 2021;239:19-26. doi:10.1016/j.ahj.2021.05.004.

13. Demin VV, Murzaikina MM, Demin DV, et al. Real Time Co-registration of Intravascular Ultrasound, Coronary Angiography and Fractional Flow Reserve Date. J Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology. 2022;16(4):6-15. (In Russ.) doi:10.25512/DIR.2022.16.4.01.

14. Demin VV, Murzaikina MM, Demin DV, et al. Co-registration of Coronary Angiography, Intravascular Visualization and Physiology Data During Interventions on Coronary Arteries. J Orenburg Medical Herald. 2022;X;3(39):22-8. (In Russ.)