Fluid-filled versus sensor-tipped pressure guidewires for FFR and Pd/Pa measurement; PW-COMPARE study

Rob Eerdekens, Pim A. L. Tonino, Frederik M. Zimmermann, Koen Teeuwen, Pieter-Jan Vlaar, Guus A. de Waard, Niels van Royen, Lokien X. van Nunen

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Fluid-filled pressure guidewires are unaffected by the previously inevitable hydrostatic pressure gradient (HPG). This study aimed to compare simultaneous pressure measurements with fluid-filled and sensor-tipped pressure guidewires. Methods: Fifty patients underwent fractional flow reserve (FFR) and P d/P a measurement with a fluid-filled and a sensor-tipped pressure guidewire simultaneously. To assess maneuverability, patients were randomized with respect to which pressure guidewire was used to cross the lesion first. Lateral fluoroscopy was used to estimate height difference between catheter tip and distal wire position (and thus HPG). Agreement between pressure measurements was studied. Results: Measurements were performed in LM (4% (n = 2)), LAD (44% (n = 22)), LCX (26% (n = 13)), and RCA (26% (n = 13)). Simultaneous pressure measurements showed excellent agreement (mean FFR difference − 0.01 ± 0.03 (r = 0.959, p < 0.001), mean P d/P a difference − 0.01 ± 0.04 (r = 0.929, p < 0.001)). FFR was ≤0.80 in 42.6% (n = 20) with fluid-filled FFR measurements versus 46.8% (n = 22) by sensor-tipped FFR measurements. Mean height difference was 15 ± 34 mm, and strongly dependent on the coronary artery (LAD 45 ± 10 mm, LCX −23 ± 16 mm, RCA −13 ± 17 mm). There was a strong correlation between height difference and difference in pressure ratios between sensor-tipped and fluid-filled pressure guidewires (FFR r = −0.850, p < 0.001; P d/P a r = −0.641, p < 0.001). Largest FFR differences were present in the LAD (−0.04 ± 0.02). After HPG correction, mean difference between HPG-corrected sensor-tipped FFR and fluid-filled FFR was 0.00 ± 0.02, mean P d/P a difference was 0.01 ± 0.03. Conclusions: This study shows excellent overall correlation between FFR and P d/P a measurements with both pressure guidewires. Differences measured with fluid-filled and sensor-tipped pressure guidewires are vessel-specific and attributable to hydrostatic pressure gradients (NCT04802681).

Original languageEnglish
Article number131998
JournalInternational journal of cardiology
Volume406
Early online date2024
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jul 2024

Keywords

  • Coronary physiology
  • Fractional flow reserve
  • Hydrostatic pressure gradient
  • Non-hyperemic pressure ratios

Cite this