Abstract:We read with great interest the article by Onuma et al. [1] which evaluated the long-term safety and efficacy of ABSORB bioasorbable everolimus-eluting stent (BVS) scaffold. The investigators of the study have made pioneering contributions to the assessment of bioresorbable scaffolds. It was concluded that sustained safety could be achieved after the implantation of a fully bioresorbable Absorb everolimus-eluting scalffold with a low event rate at 5 years. Besides, the ABSORB Cohort A trial confirmed the feasibility of noninvasive anatomic and functional assessment of the scaffold with the use of multislice computed tomography (MSCT) angiography and MSCT-based fractional flow reserve (FFR) assessment. However, we have several concerns with regard to the study. First, we have to notice that noninvasive FFR analysis was feasible only in 13 patients. The limited size has weakened the reliability of noninvasive FFR performance in assessing functional outcome of ABSORB BVS. Good image quality of all coronary arteries and accurate lumen boundary descriptions are essential for the noninvasive FFR interpretation [2]. Although published reports suggested that CT derived FFR (FFRCT) accuracy was less affected by MSCT image quality than CT stenosis [3], there were four patients (22.2%) who cannot have FFRCT analysis due to severe artifact. Besides, in those with feasible FFRCT, numerous artifacts including calcification, motion, and misregistration may also affect MSCT performance and lead to inaccurate anatomic models for FFRCT computation [4]. Thus, the feasibility and precision of FFRCT need to be further improved. It is not appropriate to use FFRCT alone as a hemodynamic parameter in functional coronary stenosis measurement. Second, a fly in the ointment of the study was the absence of invasive FFR as a reference against noninvasive FFRCT at 5 years. Despite Onuma et al. demonstrated several reasons that they decided to perform repeat MSCT alone instead of invasive imaging, we cannot deny the fact that no published convincing trial exists for FFRCT in the evaluation of interventional treatment [4], although the DISCOVER-FLOW study [5] validated that the FFRCT had a good correlation with an invasive FFR, and the DeFACTO trial [6] demonstrated that the FFRCT plus CT was superior to CT alone as a measure of coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) stenosis severity for determination of lesion-specific ischemia. Finally, in the study, angiographic reference standard of the vessel lumen area was derived from MSCT analysis instead of invasive coronary angiography [1]. It is important, however, to note that there is an overestimation of stenosis severity identified by CCTA and even among severe stenosis confirmed by invasive coronary angiography, only a minority cause ischemia [4,6]. Therefore, the possible deviation resulted from the inaccurate reference of MSCT may make the results less convincible.

Automated quantification of stenosis severity on 64-slice CT: a comparison with quantitative coronary angiography

Quantitative analysis by 64-slice computed tomography in diagnosis of intermediate coronary artery stenosis

Quantitative Angiography and Optical Coherence Tomography for the Functional Assessment of Mild-to-moderate Coronary Stenoses: Comparison with Fractional Flow Reserve

Automatic quantification and characterization of coronary atherosclerosis with computed tomography coronary angiography: cross-correlation with intravascular ultrasound virtual histology

Quantitative angiography and optical coherence tomography for the functional assessment of nonobstructive coronary stenoses: comparison with fractional flow reserve.

Quantification of Coronary Artery Stenosis in Very-High-Risk Patients Using Ultra-High Resolution Spectral Photon-Counting CT

Quantitive evaluation of coronary artery stenosis and in-stent restenosis by 64-slice spiral CT angiography and DSA

Challenges in Multislice Computed Tomography Based Fractional Flow Reserve to Evaluate Interventional Treatment

Accuracy of 64-slice CT for detecting coronary stenosis: comparison with coronary angiography

Improved quantification of coronary stenosis in patients with high calcium scores using spectral reconstructions in coronary CT angiography

Quantification of three-dimensional computed tomography angiography for evaluating coronary luminal stenosis using digital subtraction angiography as the standard of reference

Optimal scanning protocols of 64-slice CT angiography in coronary artery stents: an in vitro phantom study

Optimal diagnostic approach for using CT-derived quantitative flow ratio in patients with stenosis on coronary computed tomography angiography

Accuracy of ultra-high resolution and virtual non-calcium reconstruction algorithm for stenosis evaluation with photon-counting CT: results from a dynamic phantom study

Stenosis quantification of coronary artery CTA images based on fuzzy C-means algorithm

Quantification of Coronary Arterial Stenoses in CTA Using Fuzzy Distance Transform.

Virtual calcium removal in calcified coronary arteries with photon-counting detector CT—first in-vivo experience

The Experiment Study of Coronary Artery Imaging by 64 Slice Multidetector Computed Tomography Angiography with Pulsating Cardiac Phantom

Clinical quantitative coronary artery stenosis and coronary atherosclerosis imaging: a Consensus Statement from the Quantitative Cardiovascular Imaging Study Group

Non-calcified Plaque-based Coronary Stenosis Grading in Contrast Enhanced CT

Accuracy of Detecting Coronary Artery Stenosis Between 64-multislice Spiral CT and Selective Coronary Angiography:A Comparative Study