Abstract
BACKGROUND: Coronary fractional flow reserve (FFR) determination is a valuable tool for the assessment of stenosis significance in intermediate coronary obstructions. Maximal hyperemia is mandatory for this determination. Although intravenous (IV) Adenosine is the standard agent used, its use carries an elevated incidence of side effects. Intracoronary sodium nitroprusside (IC NTP) is a very well-known coronary vasodilator, but it is not routinely used for FFR determinations. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of the present study was to compare FFR determinations and side effect profile of IC NTP with IV Adenosine. METHODS: We prospectively assessed FFR determinations in a total of 20 intermediate coronary artery stenotic lesions in 18 consecutive patients with the administration of IV Adenosine (140 μg/kg/min) and IC NTP (100 μg). The appearance of side effects was registered. RESULTS: The mean age was 55.5 ± 7.5 years. Fifteen (83%) of the patients were male. Mean FFR values with IC NTP were similar to those obtained with IV Adenosine (0.82 ± 0.07 vs 0.82 ± 0.06, respectively, r = 0.775, p < 0.0001). Intravenous Adenosine induced side effects in 45% of patients (shortness of breath 30%, flushing 5%, headache 5%, angina pectoris 5%, and transient conduction disturbances 10%). No side effects were reported with IC NTP. CONCLUSIONS: IC NTP at a dose of 100 μg is as effective as IV Adenosine for FFR assessment. Besides, it is better tolerated and should be consider as a vasodilator agent in the assessment of FFR.