ジユウジヨウ　ケンタロウ   Jiyuujiyou Kentarou   重城　健太郎    所属   医学部 医学科（東京女子医科大学病院）    職種   講師
論文種別	原著
言語種別	英語
査読の有無	査読あり
表題	Evaluation of the cut-off value for the instantaneous wave-free ratio of patients with aortic valve stenosis.
掲載誌名	正式名：Cardiovascular intervention and therapeutics 略　 称：Cardiovasc Interv Ther ISSNコード：1868-4300/1868-4297
掲載区分	国内
出版社	Springer Japan published in cooperation with Japanese Association of Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics
巻・号・頁	34(3),pp.269-274
著者・共著者	ARASHI Hiroyuki†, YAMAGUCHI Junichi*, RI Tonre, TANAKA Kazuki, OOTSUKI Hisao, NAKAO Masashi, KAMISHIMA Kazuho, JUJO Kentaro, MINAMI Yuichiro, OGAWA Hiroshi, HAGIWARA Nobuhisa
発行年月	2019/07
概要	The aim of this study was to examine the clinical value of iFR for AS patients. Functional evaluation of coronary stenosis in patients with aortic valve stenosis (AS) is challenging because the stress-induced test is often thought to be a contraindication. AS patients have a unique coronary flow pattern dependent on the diastolic phase. The instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) is a vasodilator-free, invasive pressure wire index of the functional severity of coronary stenosis and is calculated under resting conditions. And iFR calculated during a specific period of diastole may have the potential benefit to assess the functional severity of coronary stenosis in AS patients. We examined 158 consecutive patients (217 stenoses) whose iFR and fractional flow reserve (FFR) were measured simultaneously. Among the 158 patients, AS was observed in 13 (8.2%). The iFR showed good correlation with FFR in AS patients. The best cut-off value of iFR for the receiver-operator curve analysis to predict FFR of 0.8 was 0.9 for non-AS patients. However, it was 0.73 for AS patients. The present study demonstrated good correlation between iFR and FFR for AS patients. Vasodilator-free assessment using iFR may provide potential benefits when evaluating coronary stenosis in patients with AS. In AS patients, the best cut-off of iFR value predicting FFR value of 0.8 was lower than 0.9 that is the standard predictive value of iFR.
DOI	10.1007/s12928-018-0556-3
PMID	30460666