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.

Fractional flow reserve in below the knee arteries with critical limb ischemia and validation against gold-standard morphologic, functional measures and long term clinical outcomes

Correlation and Relative Prognostic Value of Fractional Flow Reserve and Pd/Pa of Nonculprit Lesions in ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction

Angiographic Findings and Post-Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Fractional Flow Reserve

Determinants of Functional Significance of Coronary Bifurcation Lesions and Clinical Outcomes after Physiology-Guided Treatment

Clinical Implications of Three-Vessel Fractional Flow Reserve Measurement in Patients with Coronary Artery Disease

Prognostic value of fractional flow reserve: linking physiologic severity to clinical outcomes.

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

Prolonged High-Pressure Balloon Angioplasty of Femoropopliteal Lesions: Impact on Stent Implantation Rate and Mid-Term Outcome

Diagnostic Performance of Angiography-Based Fractional Flow Reserve for Functional Evaluation of Coronary Artery Stenosis

Vascular flow reserve immediately after infrapopliteal intervention as a predictor of wound healing in patients with foot tissue loss

Diagnostic Performance of Angiography-Based Fractional Flow Reserve for Functional Evaluation of Coronary Artery Stenosis.

Clinical Outcomes of Deferred Lesions with Angiographically Insignificant Stenosis but Low Fractional Flow Reserve.

Fractional Flow Reserve or Intravascular Ultrasound for PCI.

Fractional flow reserve to determine the appropriateness of angioplasty in moderate coronary stenosis: a randomized trial

Fractional flow reserve and instantaneous wave-free ratio in coronary artery bypass grafting: a meta-analysis and practice review

Fractional Flow Reserve Implications for Clinical Decision Making in Coronary Artery Disease

Operator decision-making in angiography-only guided revascularization for lesions not indicated for FFR: a QFR-based functional assessment in chronic coronary syndrome

Angiography-derived physiological assessment after percutaneous coronary intervention of chronic total occlusions

Prognostic value of combined fractional flow reserve and pressure-bounded coronary flow reserve: outcomes in FFR and Pb-CFR assessment

Diagnostic Accuracy of Coronary Angiography-Based Vessel Fractional Flow Reserve (vFFR) Virtual Stenting

Image-based assessment of fractional flow reserve.