Patients with acute myocardial infarction may harbor multiple complex coronary plaques that are associated with adverse clinical outcomes. Plaque instability may be due to a widespread process throughout the coronary vessels, which may have implications for the management of acute ischemic heart disease.

No abstract

Background: Invasive fractional flow reserve (FFR INV ) is the standard technique for assessing myocardial ischemia. Pressure distortions and measurement location may influence FFR INV interpretation. We report a technique for performing invasive fractional flow reserve (FFR INV ) by minimizing pressure distortions and identifying the proper location to measure FFR INV . Methods: FFR INV recordings were obtained prospectively during manual hyperemic pullback in 100 normal and diseased coronary arteries with single stenosis, using 4 measurements from the terminal vessel, distal-to-the-lesion, proximal vessel, and guiding catheter. FFR INV profiles were developed by plotting FFR INV values ( y -axis) and site of measurement ( x -axis), stratified by stenosis severity. FFR INV ≤0.8 was considered positive for lesion-specific ischemia. Results: Erroneous FFR INV values were observed in 10% of vessels because of aortic pressure distortion and in 21% because of distal pressure drift; these were corrected by disengagement of the guiding catheter and re-equalization of distal pressure/aortic pressure, respectively. There were significant declines in FFR INV from the proximal to the terminal vessel in normal and stenotic coronary arteries ( P <0.001). The rate of positive FFR INV was 41% when measured from the terminal vessel and 20% when measured distal-to-the-lesion ( P <0.001); 41.5% of positive terminal measurements were reclassified to negative when measured distal-to-the-lesion. Measuring FFR INV 20 to 30 mm distal-to-the-lesion (rather than from the terminal vessel) can reduce errors in measurement and optimize the assessment of lesion-specific ischemia. Conclusions: Meticulous technique (disengagement of the guiding catheter, FFR INV pullback) is required to avoid erroneous FFR INV , which occur in 31% of vessels. Even with optimal technique, FFR INV values are influenced by stenosis severity and the site of pressure measurement. FFR INV values from the terminal vessel may overestimate lesion-specific ischemia, leading to unnecessary revascularization.

SummaryBackground: The majority of cardiovascular deaths occur in the elderly. The safety and results of primary infarct intervention in octogenarians is not well characterized.Hypothesis: The purpose of this study was to compare the results of primary infarct intervention in octogenarians with those in younger patients during [1997][1998] and to compare these results to those obtained in octogenarians treated in 1991-1994.Methods: During 1997-1998, 40 octogenarians were treated with primary infarct intervention and were compared with 60 randomly selected patients aged < 80 years treated during the same time period. The results in octogenarians were compared with the results in a group of 37 patients of similar age treated in 1991-1994. The baseline characteristics, procedural results, and hospital outcome were obtained from a prospectively designed interventional database at a busy single-center program.Results: There was no significant difference in hospital survival between the two groups of patients treated in 1997-1998 although there was a trend toward higher mortality in the octogenarian group. Length of stay and use of intra-aortic balloon pumps were greater in the octogenarian group. When the results in octogenarians treated in 1997-1998 were compared with the group of 37 patients treated in 1991-1994, the hospital mortality declined from 27 to 10% (p = 0.05).Conclusions: There has been improvement in hospital mortality over the past decade for patients aged ≥ 80 years treated

Fractional flow reserve has been increasingly popular in assessing the severity of coronary stenosis in indeterminate lesions. Moreover, it has had an increasing role as a prognostic indicator and has been incorporated in different angiographic scores to assess the appropriate revascularization strategy. This chapter will review the current state of FFR.