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.

Challenges in Diagnosis and Functional Assessment of Coronary Artery Disease in Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis

Prolonged Coronary Transit Time and Reversed Flow Causing Functional Ischemia, Chest Pain and Syncope in Patients with Aortic Stenosis and Patent Coronary Arteries: An Angiographic and Machine Learning Analysis

Coronary Microcirculation in Aortic Stenosis: Pathophysiology, Invasive Assessment, and Future Directions

Coronary Physiology During Exercise and Vasodilation in the Healthy Heart and in Severe Aortic Stenosis

Diagnostic performance of computed tomography-derived fractional flow reserve in patients with severe aortic stenosis

Feasibility and Utility of Anatomical and Physiological Evaluation of Coronary Disease With Cardiac CT in Severe Aortic Stenosis (FUTURE-AS Registry): Rationale and Design

Coronary artery disease and TAVI: Current evidence on a recurrent issue

Moderate aortic stenosis: Navigating the uncharted

Aortic Stenosis, Heart Failure, and Aortic Valve Replacement

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

Advanced CT measures of coronary artery disease with intermediate stenosis in patients with severe aortic valve stenosis

Diagnostic Challenges in Aortic Stenosis

Absolute coronary flow and microvascular resistance reserve in patients with severe aortic stenosis

The Impact of Coronary Physiology on Contemporary Clinical Decision Making.

Aortic Stenosis With Coronary Artery Disease: SAVR or TAVR-When and How?

A Comprehensive Geriatric Workup and Frailty Assessment in Older Patients with Severe Aortic Stenosis

The functional assessment of patients with non-obstructive coronary artery disease: expert review from an international microcirculation working group

Integrated Assessment of Computational Coronary Physiology from a Single Angiographic View in Patients Undergoing TAVI.

Role of physiology in the management of multivessel disease among patients with acute coronary syndrome

From the Pathophysiology to the Intervention, Current Challenges, and Future Perspectives

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