Abstract:Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: None. Introduction Among patients with intermediate coronary artery stenosis (50-90%), assessment of functional significance of the lesion by instantaneous wave free ratio (iFR)/ fractional flow reserve (FFR) is recommended in latest guidelines. Though iFR is not much affected by change in hemodynamics compared to FFR, the change in iFR vs FFR due to various hemodynamic factors need a validation. Left ventricular end-diastolic pressure (LVEDP) is one of the hemodynamic factors whose variation and effect on FFR vs iFR is largely unknown. In the present study we evaluated the association of change in LVEDP on the changing pattern of iFR/FFR which may hold a clinical significance especially with percutaneous coronary intervention in heart failure patients. Methods This was a prospective, investigator-initiated, single-center study involving 20 patients with stable coronary artery disease and at least one intermediate coronary lesion (50-90%). The enrolled patients were subjected to both iFR and FFR along with baseline LVEDP measurement. Subsequently, intravenous nitroglycerine infusion was given to reduce LVEDP and corresponding iFR and FFR were re-evaluated. The dynamic changes in iFR and FFR were studied in relation to changes in LVEDP using Pearson’s correlation analysis and linear regression analysis. Results The mean LVEDP was lowered from 16.20 ± 1.54 mmHg to 9.50 ± 1.10 mmHg, the mean iFR and FFR got changed from 0.80 ± 0.12 to 0.76 ± 0.12 mmHg and 0.75 ± 0.09 to 0.72 ± 0.09 mmHg respectively. On Pearson’s correlation analysis, LVEDP change did not show statistically significant correlation (linear relationship) with iFR (p = 0.105, r2 = 0.373) and FFR (p = 0.227, r2 = 0.283) changes across the entire range of stenosis severity and in all vessels. Linear regression analysis did not state any independent correlation between LVEDP and iFR and FFR changes in the study group (p >0.05). The % R2 value for iFR and FFR (as a coefficient of determination) of the regression equation were 13.9% and 8%, which means only these percentages of the total variance in iFR and FFR change were explained by LVEDP changes respectively. There was no serious adverse event related to the procedure. Conclusion To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study comparing the effect of changes in LVEDP on both iFR and FFR simultaneously. In our study, 1 mmHg change in LVEDP was associated with a change in FFR by 0.004 and change in iFR by 0.004 which didn’t reveal any significant association (p = 0.227 and 0.105 respectively). This helps us to put FFR at par with iFR under variable hemodynamics. So either of the variables may be used interchangeably with confidence in varied hemodynamic conditions including patients with heart failure. The correlation was non-significant across entire range of stenosis severity, irrespective of sex, age, diabetes and hypertension. This study sets platform for further research with larger number of heterogeneous patient population. Abstract Figure. Box whisker plot

Diastolic hyperemia-free ratio for the assessment of intermediate coronary artery stenosis in patients with hemodialysis

Diagnostic Performance of Diastolic Hyperemia-free Ratio Compared with Invasive Fractional Flow Reserve for Evaluation of Coronary Artery Disease

Diagnostic Performance of Immediate Angiography Derived Quantitative Flow Ratio in Patients after Second Generation Drug Eluting Stent and Bioresorable Scaffold Implantation

Comparison of Diagnostic Accuracy of Immediate Angiography Derived Residual Quantitative Flow Ratio after Bioresorbable Scaffold and Drug Eluting Stent Implantation

Accuracy of Intravascular Ultrasound-Based Fractional Flow Reserve in Identifying Hemodynamic Significance of Coronary Stenosis

Combined assessment of fractional flow reserve, resting full-cycle ratio, and resting ratio of distal coronary to aortic pressure for clinical outcomes

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

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

Diagnostic Performance of AccuFFRangio in the Functional Assessment of Coronary Stenosis Compared with Pressure Wire-Derived Fractional Flow Reserve.

P1252Diagnostic Performance of Quantitative Flow Ratio from Coronary Angiography Versus Fractional Flow Reserve from Computed Tomography

Evaluation of Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio and Fractional Flow Reserve in Severe Aortic Valve Stenosis

Correlation and consistency between resting full-cycle ratio and fractional flow reserve in assessing coronary artery function in a Chinese real-world cohort with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome: a retrospective observational study

Diastolic versus systolic coronary computed tomography angiography derived fractional flow reserve for the identification of lesion-specific ischemia

Instantaneous wave-free ratio and fractional flow reserve: effect of variation in left ventricular end diastolic pressure

Diagnostic Performance of Intracoronary Optical Coherence Tomography-Based Versus Angiography-Based Fractional Flow Reserve for the Evaluation of Coronary Lesions.

Fractional Flow Reserve Evaluation and Chronic Kidney Disease: Analysis From a Multicenter Italian Registry (the FREAK Study)

The relationship between the basal coronary translesional pressure ratio and fractional flow reserve

Endothelial dysfunction assessed by digital tonometry and discrepancy between fraction flow reserve and instantaneous wave free ratio

Impact of diabetes mellitus on the relationship between a Poiseuille-based index and fractional flow reserve in intermediate coronary lesions

Coronary Angiography-Derived Diastolic Pressure Ratio

Diagnostic Performance of Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio for the Evaluation of Coronary Stenosis Severity Confirmed by Fractional Flow Reserve