Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2019 Nov;49(11):1022-1032.
doi: 10.4070/kcj.2019.0074. Epub 2019 Jun 5.

The Current Status of Intervention for Intermediate Coronary Stenosis in the Korean Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (K-PCI) Registry

Jin Ho Kim  1 , Woonggil Choi  1 , Ki Chang Kim  1 , Chang Wook Nam  2 , Bum Kee Hong  3 , June Hong Kim  4 , Doo Soo Jeon  5 , Jang Whan Bae  6 , Sang Hyun Kim  7 , Keon Woong Moon  8 , Byung Ryul Cho  9 , Doo Il Kim  10 , Jae Sik Jang  11
Affiliations

The Current Status of Intervention for Intermediate Coronary Stenosis in the Korean Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (K-PCI) Registry

Jin Ho Kim et al. Korean Circ J. 2019 Nov.

Abstract

Background and objectives: Intermediate coronary lesion that can be under- or over-estimated by visual estimation frequently results in stenting of functionally nonsignificant lesions or deferral of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of significant lesions inappropriately. We evaluated current status of PCI for intermediate lesions from a standardized database in Korea.

Methods: We analyzed the Korean percutaneous coronary intervention (K-PCI) registry data which collected a standardized PCI database of the participating hospitals throughout the country from January 1, 2014, through December 31, 2014. Intermediate lesion was defined as a luminal narrowing between 50% and 70% by visual estimation and then compared whether the invasive physiologic or imaging study was performed or not.

Results: Physiology-guided PCI for intermediate lesions was performed in 16.8% for left anterior descending artery (LAD), 9.8% for left circumflex artery (LCX), 13.2% for right coronary artery (RCA). PCI was more frequently performed using intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) than using fractional flow reserve (FFR) for coronary artery segments (27.7% vs. 13.9% for LAD, 32.9% vs. 8.1% for LCX, and 33.8% vs. 10.8% for RCA). In accordance with or without FFR, PCI for intermediate lesions was more frequently performed in the hospitals with available FFR device than without FFR, especially in left main artery (LM), proximal LAD lesion (40.9% vs. 5.9% for LM, 24.6% vs 7.6% for proximal LAD).

Conclusions: These data provide the current PCI practice pattern with the use of FFR and IVUS in intermediate lesion. More common use of FFR for intermediate lesion should be encouraged.

Keywords: Coronary artery disease; Fractional flow reserve, myocardial; Percutaneous coronary intervention.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have no financial conflicts of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. Comparison of PCI rates for coronary vessels according to stenotic severity.
LAD = left anterior descending artery; LCX = left circumflex artery; LM = left main artery; p-LAD = proximal left anterior descending artery; PCI = percutaneous coronary intervention; RCA = right coronary artery.
Figure 2
Figure 2. Use of adjunctive PCI tools according to the availability of FFR.
FFR = fractional flow reserve; FFR(+) = Hospitals that were equipped with FFR device; FFR(−) = Hospitals that were not equipped with FFR device; IVUS = intravascular ultrasound; LAD = left anterior descending artery; LCX = left circumflex artery; LM = left main artery; p-LAD = proximal left anterior descending artery; PCI = percutaneous coronary intervention; RCA = right coronary artery.
Figure 3
Figure 3. Comparison of PCI rates according to availability of FFR.
FFR = fractional flow reserve; FFR(+) = Hospitals that were equipped with FFR device; FFR(−) = Hospitals that were not equipped with FFR device; IVUS = intravascular ultrasound; LAD = left anterior descending artery; LCX = left circumflex artery; LM = left main artery; p-LAD = proximal left anterior descending artery; PCI = percutaneous coronary intervention; RCA = right coronary artery.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Park SJ, Kang SJ, Ahn JM, et al. Visual-functional mismatch between coronary angiography and fractional flow reserve. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2012;5:1029–1036. - PubMed
    1. Trask N, Califf RM, Conley MJ, et al. Accuracy and interobserver variability of coronary cineangiography: a comparison with postmortem evaluation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1984;3:1145–1154. - PubMed
    1. Katritsis D, Webb-Peploe M. Limitations of coronary angiography: an underestimated problem? Clin Cardiol. 1991;14:20–24. - PubMed
    1. Patel MR, Calhoon JH, Dehmer GJ, et al. ACC/AATS/AHA/ASE/ASNC/SCAI/SCCT/STS 2017 appropriate use criteria for coronary revascularization in patients with stable ischemic heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, American Heart Association, American Society of Echocardiography, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;69:2212–2241. - PubMed
    1. Authors/Task Force members. Windecker S, Kolh P, et al. 2014 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization: The Task Force on Myocardial Revascularization of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS)Developed with the special contribution of the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) Eur Heart J. 2014;35:2541–2619. - PubMed