DOI: 10.4244/EIJV13I17A341

Reply to the letter to the editor by Yaeger regarding the article “In vivo validation of mathematically derived fractional flow reserve for assessing haemodynamics of coronary tandem lesions”

We appreciate the interest in our article1. The author raised the issues of the driving force for myocardial flow, the flow ratio estimation, and the procedural order. Also, the author suggested that the application of the prediction model in Yaeger2 would improve the outcomes of FFR prediction.

Spaan et al3 showed that, even without collateral flows, (Pd–Pv)/(Pa–Pv) overestimates the coronary flow ratio (QS/QN) and the microvascular resistance (Rmin) increases as the distal pressure (Pd) falls. To build an equation to describe the P–Q relationship better, we introduced “R” corresponding to the inverse of the slope for Q vs. Pd–Pw, instead of using a constant microvascular resistance (Figure4 in Spaan et al3). The flow ratios to branches, in the same regard, were estimated using anatomical metrics. Because “R” in our mathematical derivation is dimensionally equivalent to the resistance in electronic circuit modelling, we called it “resistance”.

For determining the procedural order, previous studies have recommended that treatment of the stenosis with greater pressure or FFR gradient during pressure wire pullback should be prioritised4, as addressed in the introduction of our article1. Please remember that the objective of our work was to propose a better method for predicting more severe lesions.

The prediction model of Yaeger2 was examined and the outcomes are listed in Table 1. The mean error was 0.057±0.059 and the mean absolute error was 0.063±0.052. In the Appendix, please find the translation of Yaeger’s prediction model2 to the notations in our derivation.

Appendix. Translation of Yaeger’s prediction model to the notations in the derivation by Kweon et al

For simplicity, abbreviations are used as follows.

FFRapp(LM)=a

FFRtrue(LM)=b

FFRapp(LAD) =FFRtrue(LAD)=c Eq (*1)

FFRreal(LM)=d

FFRreal(LAD)=e

From the pullback measurement, FFRapp(LM) and FFRapp(LAD) are obtained. For the comparison with our mathematical model, we rephrased the equations in Yaeger2 as functions of “a” and “c” as follows.

Equation (19) in Yaeger2 is:

Using the abbreviations above, it becomes:

Eq (*2)

By multiplying both numerator and denominator by 2b, we can get:

.

By multiplying both sides by the denominator, it becomes:

a(1+b+c–bc)=2b and a(1+c)=b(ac–a+2).

Subsequently, b can be expressed as:

. Eq (*3)

Equation (23) in Yaeger2 is:

.

Using the abbreviations above, it becomes:

.

Using the expression in Eq (*3), we can get:

.

Using the notations in Yaeger2, the prediction equation for LAD treatment becomes:

.

Equation (34) for the LM treatment in Yaeger2 is:

.

Using the abbreviations above, it becomes:

.

Using the expression in Eq (*2), we can get:

e=ac.

Using the notations in Yaeger2, the prediction equation for LM treatment becomes:

FFRreal (LAD)=FFRapp (LM)×FFRtrue (LAD).

Using the notations in our derivation, the equations above are translated as follows:

for proximal treatment,

for distal treatment.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Supplementary data

Both of the letters to the Editor disputing the paper, “Invivo validation of mathematically derived fractional flow reserve for assessing haemodynamics of coronary tandem lesions”1, together with all further correspondence can be found online in the Supplementary data.

To read the full content of this article, please download the PDF.

Volume 13 Number 17
Apr 20, 2018
Volume 13 Number 17
View full issue


Key metrics

Suggested by Cory

10.4244/EIJV12I11A219 Dec 9, 2016
FFR in daily clinical practice: from “Prêt-à-Porter” to “Haute Couture”
Finet G and Rioufol G
free

Clinical research

10.4244/EIJ-D-18-00668 Oct 18, 2019
Personalised fractional flow reserve: a novel concept to optimise myocardial revascularisation
Gosling R et al
free
Trending articles
309.93

State-of-the-Art Review

10.4244/EIJ-D-21-00695 Nov 19, 2021
Transcatheter treatment for tricuspid valve disease
Praz F et al
free
166.7

Expert review

10.4244/EIJ-D-21-00690 May 15, 2022
Crush techniques for percutaneous coronary intervention of bifurcation lesions
Moroni F et al
free
92.2

State-of-the-Art Review

10.4244/EIJ-D-20-01296 Aug 27, 2021
Management of cardiogenic shock
Thiele H et al
free
76

State-of-the-Art

10.4244/EIJ-D-23-00840 Sep 2, 2024
Aortic regurgitation: from mechanisms to management
Baumbach A et al
free
72.85

State-of-the-Art

10.4244/EIJ-D-24-00386 Feb 3, 2025
Mechanical circulatory support for complex, high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention
Ferro E et al
free
58.3

Clinical research

10.4244/EIJ-D-23-00344 Sep 18, 2023
Clinical outcomes of TAVI with the Myval balloon-expandable valve for non-calcified aortic regurgitation
Sanchez-Luna JP et al
free
56.65

Clinical research

10.4244/EIJ-D-20-01155 Oct 20, 2021
A deep learning algorithm for detecting acute myocardial infarction
Liu W et al
free
33.9

CLINICAL RESEARCH

10.4244/EIJ-D-17-00381 Oct 11, 2017
Stent malapposition and the risk of stent thrombosis: mechanistic insights from an in vitro model
Foin N et al
free
33.65

State-of-the-Art

10.4244/EIJ-D-23-00606 Jan 1, 2024
Targeting inflammation in atherosclerosis: overview, strategy and directions
Waksman R et al
free
X

The Official Journal of EuroPCR and the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI)

EuroPCR EAPCI
PCR ESC
Impact factor: 7.6
2023 Journal Citation Reports®
Science Edition (Clarivate Analytics, 2024)
Online ISSN 1969-6213 - Print ISSN 1774-024X
© 2005-2025 Europa Group - All rights reserved