No abstract

Heparin infusion after successful coronary intervention is associated with more minor bleeding and vascular injury, prolonged length of stay and increased cost. In-hospital and one-month ischemic events rarely occur after successful intervention, irrespective of heparin use. Routine postprocedure heparin is not recommended, even in patients who present with unstable ischemic syndromes.

No abstract

No abstract

Background: Invasive fractional flow reserve (FFR INV ) is the standard technique for assessing myocardial ischemia. Pressure distortions and measurement location may influence FFR INV interpretation. We report a technique for performing invasive fractional flow reserve (FFR INV ) by minimizing pressure distortions and identifying the proper location to measure FFR INV . Methods: FFR INV recordings were obtained prospectively during manual hyperemic pullback in 100 normal and diseased coronary arteries with single stenosis, using 4 measurements from the terminal vessel, distal-to-the-lesion, proximal vessel, and guiding catheter. FFR INV profiles were developed by plotting FFR INV values ( y -axis) and site of measurement ( x -axis), stratified by stenosis severity. FFR INV ≤0.8 was considered positive for lesion-specific ischemia. Results: Erroneous FFR INV values were observed in 10% of vessels because of aortic pressure distortion and in 21% because of distal pressure drift; these were corrected by disengagement of the guiding catheter and re-equalization of distal pressure/aortic pressure, respectively. There were significant declines in FFR INV from the proximal to the terminal vessel in normal and stenotic coronary arteries ( P <0.001). The rate of positive FFR INV was 41% when measured from the terminal vessel and 20% when measured distal-to-the-lesion ( P <0.001); 41.5% of positive terminal measurements were reclassified to negative when measured distal-to-the-lesion. Measuring FFR INV 20 to 30 mm distal-to-the-lesion (rather than from the terminal vessel) can reduce errors in measurement and optimize the assessment of lesion-specific ischemia. Conclusions: Meticulous technique (disengagement of the guiding catheter, FFR INV pullback) is required to avoid erroneous FFR INV , which occur in 31% of vessels. Even with optimal technique, FFR INV values are influenced by stenosis severity and the site of pressure measurement. FFR INV values from the terminal vessel may overestimate lesion-specific ischemia, leading to unnecessary revascularization.