Background and objective: Left main coronary artery disease (LMCA) is still a widely accepted indication for coronary artery bypass surgery. Intermediate LMCA disease, however, often cannot be evaluated reliably on the basis of clinical and angiographic information alone. The deferral of surgical revascularization based on fractional flow reserve (FFR) measurements has been shown to be safe and feasible when taking an FFR value of (3) 0.75 as cutoff. This study was performed to compare the accuracy of visual angiographic assessment of intermediate LMCA stenoses by experienced interventional cardiologists with functional assessment by FFR in a patient population with excellent long-term outcome after deferral of surgery on the basis of FFR measurements.
Patients and methods: 24 of 51 consecutive patients with intermediate LMCA disease were deferred from surgery based on an FFR value of > or = 0.75. Each angiogram was retrospectively reviewed independently by three experienced interventional cardiologists. Reviewers were blinded to initial FFR results, clinical data, and clinical outcome and asked to classify each lesion as SIGNIFICANT (FFR < 0.75), NOT SIGNIFICANT (FFR > or = 0.75), or UNSURE if the observer was unable to make a decision based on the angiogram.
Results: Mean follow-up was 29 +/- 13.6 months. No death or myocardial infarction was observed, event-free survival was 69 %. When taking the "unsure" classifications into consideration the individual reviewers achieved correct lesion classification with respect to FFR results on average in 58 % to 82 % of cases. Interobserver variability resulted in only 46 % of cases in concordant lesion classification (3 agreements or 2 agreements and 1 "unsure" evaluation). The number of concordant agreements between the individual pairs of reviewers did not exceed the rate of coincidental agreements that could be expected to result from simple guessing (mean KAPPA coefficient 0.04). More than 50 % of patients with excellent long-term outcome after deferral of surgery would potentially have undergone operative revascularization if consensual decision making had been solely based on angiographic lesion assessment.
Conclusion: The functional significance of intermediate or equivocal LMCA lesions should not be based on visual assessment alone, even when performed by experienced interventional cardiologists.