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.

Noninvasive Coronary Physiological Assessment Derived From Computed Tomography

Effect of lesion characteristics on diagnostic performance of CT-derived fractional flow reserve: exploring the indications for application based on CT-FFR CHINA trial (Preprint)

Non-invasive physiological assessment of coronary artery obstruction on coronary computed tomography angiography

Noninvasive Assessment of Cerebral Artery Stenoses from Anatomic Computed Tomography Angiography

Diagnostic Performance of Computational Fluid Dynamics (Cfd)-Based Fractional Flow Reserve (FFR) Derived from Coronary Computed Tomographic Angiography (CCTA) for Assessing Functional Severity of Coronary Lesions

Diagnostic Accuracy of Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography-Derived Fractional Flow Reserve

Noninvasive FFR derived from coronary CT angiography in the management of coronary artery disease: technology and clinical update

CT Assessment of Myocardial Perfusion and Fractional Flow Reserve in Coronary Artery Disease: A Review of Current Clinical Evidence and Recent Developments

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

The Impact of Coronary Physiology on Contemporary Clinical Decision Making.

Comprehensive Assessment Of Coronary Fractional Flow Reserve

Noninvasive fractional flow reserve derived from coronary computed tomography angiography for identification of ischemic lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis

CT Myocardial Perfusion and CT-FFR versus Invasive FFR for Hemodynamic Relevance of Coronary Artery Disease

Computed Tomography-Derived Fractional Flow Reserve in the Detection of Lesion-Specific Ischemia

Non-invasive CT-derived fractional flow reserve and static rest and stress CT myocardial perfusion imaging for detection of haemodynamically significant coronary stenosis

The diagnostic performance of on-site workstation-based computed tomography-derived fractional flow reserve. Comparison with myocardium perfusion imaging

Diagnostic Performance of Noninvasive Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography-Derived FFR for Coronary Lesion-Specific Ischemia Based on Deep Learning Analysis

Cardiac CT perfusion and FFRCTA: pathophysiological features in ischemic heart disease

Diagnostic performance of fractional flow reserve derived from coronary angiography, intravascular ultrasound, and optical coherence tomography; a meta-analysis

Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography Derived Flow Fractional Reserve: the State of the Art

Enhanced Diagnostic Utility Achieved By Myocardial Blood Analysis: A Meta-Analysis Of Noninvasive Cardiac Imaging In The Detection Of Functional Coronary Artery Disease