LAS VEGAS — In this video, Stuart Watkins, MD, interventional cardiologist at Golden Jubilee National Hospital in Glasgow, Scotland, outlines the results of the VERIFY-2 trial, presented at the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions Scientific Sessions.
The trial compared the use of instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) to Pd/Pa, or the ratio of distal coronary pressure to aortic pressure for the prediction of severity of coronary stenosis, in 97 patients with chest pain and standard indications for coronary angiogram. Both iFR and Pd/Pa are measured at rest, and neither require the administration of adenosine, unlike fractional flow reserve, the current gold standard.
Watkins said that the findings were consistent with those reported previously in the VERIFY and RESOLVE trials, and that no significant difference was observed in the accuracy of iFR vs. Pd/Pa while using a hybrid protocol or absolute binary cutoff. He concluded that iFR was no better than Pd/Pa for determining the significance of coronary stenosis, using FFR as a gold standard. Watkins added that the researchers do not feel that either nonhyperemic index is sufficiently accurate to guide revascularization in a cath lab.