Clinical outcomes of combined flow-pressure drop measurements using newly developed diagnostic endpoint: Pressure drop coefficient in patients with coronary artery dysfunction

Abstract

AIM: To combine pressure and flow parameter, pressure drop coefficient (CDP) will result in better clinical outcomes in comparison to the fractional flow reserve (FFR) group. METHODS: To test this hypothesis, a comparison was made between the FFR < 0.75 and CDP > 27.9 groups in this study, for the major adverse cardiac events [major adverse cardiac events (MACE): Primary outcome] and patients' quality of life (secondary outcome). Further, a comparison was also made between the survival curves for the FFR < 0.75 and CDP > 27.9 groups. Two-tailed χ (2) test proportions were performed for the comparison of primary and secondary outcomes. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was performed to compare the survival curves of FFR < 0.75 and CDP > 27.9 groups (MedcalcV10.2, Mariakerke, Belgium). Results were considered statistically significant for P < 0.05. RESULTS: The primary outcomes (%MACE) in the FFR < 0.75 group (20%, 4 out of 20) was not statistically different (P = 0.24) from the %MACE occurring in CDP > 27.9 group (8.57%, 2 out of 35). Noteworthy is the reduction in the %MACE in the CDP > 27.9 group, in comparison to the FFR < 0.75 group. Further, the secondary outcomes were not statistically significant between the FFR < 0.75 and CDP > 27.9 groups. Survival analysis results suggest that the survival time for the CDP > 27.9 group (n = 35) is significantly higher (P = 0.048) in comparison to the survival time for the FFR < 0.75 group (n = 20). The results remained similar for a FFR = 0.80 cut-off. CONCLUSION: Based on the above, CDP could prove to be a better diagnostic end-point for clinical revascularization decision-making in the cardiac catheterization laboratories.