Clinical Value of the Quantitative Flow Ratio to Predict Long-term Target Vessel Failure in Patients with In-stent Restenosis after Drug-coated Balloon Angioplasty

Abstract

Objective

The study sought to investigate the clinical predictive value of quantitative flow ratio (QFR) for the long-term target vessel failure (TVF) outcome in patients with in-stent restenosis (ISR) by using drug-coated balloon (DCB) treatment after a long-term follow-up.

Methods

This was a retrospective study. A total of 186 patients who underwent DCB angioplasty for ISR in two hospitals from March 2014 to September 2019 were enrolled. The QFR of the entire target vessel was measured offline. The primary endpoint was TVF, including target vessel-cardiac death (TV-CD), target vessel-myocardial infarction (TV-MI), and clinically driven-target vessel revascularization (CD-TVR).

Results

The follow-up time was 3.09±1.53 years, and 50 patients had TVF. The QFR immediately after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) was significantly lower in the TVF group than in the no-TVF group. Multivariable Cox regression analysis indicated that the QFR immediately after PCI was an excellent predictor for TVF after the long-term follow-up [hazard ratio (HR): 5.15×10⁻⁵ (6.13×10⁻⁸−0.043); P<0.01]. Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis demonstrated that the optimal cut-off value of the QFR immediately after PCI for predicting the long-term TVF was 0.925 (area under the curve: 0.886, 95% confidence interval: 0.834–0.938; sensitivity: 83.40%, specificity: 88.00; P<0.01). In addition, QFR≤0.925 post-PCI was strongly correlated with the TVF, including TV-MI and CD-TVR (P<0.01).

Conclusion

The QFR immediately after PCI showed a high predictive value of TVF after a long-term follow-up in ISR patients who underwent DCB angioplasty. A lower QFR immediately after PCI was associated with a worse TVF outcome.

References

[1] StefaniniGG, ByrneRA, WindeckerS, et al.. State of the art: coronary artery stents–past, present and future. EuroIntervention, 2017, 13(6): 706-716

[2] ToriiS, JinnouchiH, SakamotoA, et al.. Drug-eluting coronary stents: insights from preclinical and pathology studies. Nat Rev Cardiol, 2020, 17(1): 37-51

[3] NicolaisCV, LakhterV, VirkHUH, et al.. Therapeutic Options for In-Stent Restenosis. Curr Cardiol Rep, 2018, 20(2): 7

[4] GoelSS, Dilip GajulapalliR, AthappanG, et al.. Management of drug eluting stent in-stent restenosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv, 2016, 87(6): 1080-1091

[5] LeeMS, BankaG. In-stent Restenosis. Interv Cardiol Clin, 2016, 5(2): 211-220

[6] LiuS, WormeM, YanagawaB, et al.. Treatment of Drug-Eluting Stent In-Stent Restenosis With Drug-Eluting Balloons: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Invasive Cardiol, 2018, 30(10): 360-366

[7] PengN, LiuW, LiZ, et al.. Drug-Coated Balloons versus Everolimus-Eluting Stents in Patients with In-Stent Restenosis: A Pair-Wise Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials. Cardiovasc Ther, 2020, 2020: 1042329

[8] AokiJ, TanabeK. Mechanisms of drug-eluting stent restenosis. Cardiovasc Interv Ther, 2021, 36(1): 23-29

[9] NeumannFJ, Sousa-UvaM, AhlssonA, et al.. 2018 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization. Eur Heart J, 2019, 40(2): 87-165

[10] XuB, TuS, QiaoS, et al.. Diagnostic Accuracy of Angiography-Based Quantitative Flow Ratio Measurements for Online Assessment of Coronary Stenosis. J Am Coll Cardiol, 2017, 70(25): 3077-3087

[11] CortesC, Carrasco-MoralejaM, AparisiA, et al.. Quantitative flow ratio-Meta-analysis and systematic review. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv, 2021, 97(5): 807-814

[12] TangJ, HouH, ChuJ, et al.. Clinical implication of quantitative flow ratio to predict clinical events after drug-coated balloon angioplasty in patients with in-stent restenosis. Clin Cardiol, 2021, 44(7): 978-986

[13] CaiX, TianF, JingJ, et al.. Prognostic value of quantitative flow ratio measured immediately after drug-coated balloon angioplasty for in-stent restenosis. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv, 2021, 97(Suppl2): 1048-1054

[14] van der HeijdenLC, KokMM, LamMK, et al.. Bifurcation treatment with novel, highly flexible drug-eluting coronary stents in all-comers: 2-year outcome in patients of the DUTCH PEERS trial. Clin Res Cardiol, 2016, 105(3): 206-215

[15] BiscagliaS, TebaldiM, BrugalettaS, et al.. Prognostic Value of QFR Measured Immediately After Successful Stent Implantation: The International Multicenter Prospective HAWKEYE Study. JACC Cardiovasc Interv, 2019, 12(20): 2079-2088

[16] KogameN, TakahashiK, TomaniakM, et al.. Clinical Implication of Quantitative Flow Ratio After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for 3-Vessel Disease. JACC Cardiovasc Interv, 2019, 12(20): 2064-2075

[17] AlfonsoF, Perez-VizcaynoMJ, CardenasA, et al.. A Prospective Randomized Trial of Drug-Eluting Balloons Versus Everolimus-Eluting Stents in Patients With In-Stent Restenosis of Drug-Eluting Stents: The RIBS IV Randomized Clinical Trial. J Am Coll Cardiol, 2015, 66(1): 23-33

[18] FoyAJ, DhruvaSS, PetersonB, et al.. Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography vs Functional Stress Testing for Patients With Suspected Coronary Artery Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. JAMA Intern Med, 2017, 177(11): 1623-1631

[19] ShlofmitzE, TorgusonR, ZhangC, et al.. Impact of intravascular ultrasound on Outcomes following PErcutaneous coronary interventioN for In-stent Restenosis (iOPEN-ISR study). Int J Cardiol, 2021, 340: 17-21

[20] SeccoGG, FoinN, ViceconteN, et al.. Optical coherence tomography for guidance of treatment of in-stent restenosis with cutting balloons. EuroIntervention, 2011, 7(7): 828-834

[21] RaberL, MintzGS, KoskinasKC, et al.. Clinical use of intracoronary imaging. Part 1: guidance and optimization of coronary interventions. An expert consensus document of the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions. EuroIntervention, 2018, 14(6): 656-677

[22] CasseseS, XuB, HabaraS, et al.. Incidence and predictors of reCurrent restenosis after drug-coated balloon Angioplasty for Restenosis of a drUg-eluting Stent: The ICARUS Cooperation. Rev Esp Cardiol (Engl Ed), 2018, 71(8): 620-627