scholarly journals Feasibility and diagnostic reliability of quantitative flow ratio in the assessment of non-culprit lesions in acute coronary syndrome

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aslihan Erbay ◽  
Lisa Penzel ◽  
Youssef S. Abdelwahed ◽  
Jens Klotsche ◽  
Anne-Sophie Schatz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Diagnostic Performance ◽  
Primary Pci ◽  
Flow Ratio ◽  
Diagnostic Reliability ◽  
Index Procedure ◽  
Coronary Syndromes ◽  
Quantitative Flow Ratio ◽  
Quantitative Flow ◽  
Good Agreement

AbstractSeveral studies have demonstrated the feasibility and safety of hemodynamic assessment of non-culprit coronary arteries in setting of acute coronary syndromes (ACS) using fractional flow reserve (FFR) measurements. Quantitative flow ratio (QFR), recently introduced as angiography-based fast FFR computation, has been validated with good agreement and diagnostic performance with FFR in chronic coronary syndromes. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility and diagnostic reliability of QFR assessment during primary PCI. A total of 321 patients with ACS and multivessel disease, who underwent primary PCI and were planned for staged PCI of at least one non-culprit lesion were enrolled in the analysis. Within this patient cohort, serial post-hoc QFR analyses of 513 non-culprit vessels were performed. The median time interval between primary and staged PCI was 49 [42–58] days. QFR in non-culprit coronary arteries did not change between acute and staged measurements (0.86 vs 0.87, p = 0.114), with strong correlation (r = 0.94, p ≤ 0.001) and good agreement (mean difference -0.008, 95%CI -0.013–0.003) between measurements. Importantly, QFR as assessed at index procedure had sensitivity of 95.02%, specificity of 93.59% and diagnostic accuracy of 94.15% in prediction of QFR ≤ 0.80 at the time of staged PCI. The present study for the first time confirmed the feasibility and diagnostic accuracy of non-culprit coronary artery QFR during index procedure for ACS. These results support QFR as valuable tool in patients with ACS to detect further hemodynamic relevant lesions with excellent diagnostic performance and therefore to guide further revascularisation therapy.

scholarly journals Feasibility and Diagnostic Reliability of Quantitative Flow Ratio in the Assessment of Non-Culprit Lesions in Acute Coronary Syndrome

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aslihan Erbay ◽  
Lisa Penzel ◽  
Youssef Salah Abdelwahed ◽  
Jens Klotsche ◽  
Anne-Sophie Schatz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Coronary Arteries ◽  
Diagnostic Performance ◽  
Primary Pci ◽  
Flow Ratio ◽  
Diagnostic Reliability ◽  
Coronary Syndromes ◽  
Quantitative Flow Ratio ◽  
Quantitative Flow ◽  
Good Agreement

Abstract Purpose Several studies have demonstrated the feasibility and safety of hemodynamic assessment of non-culprit coronary arteries in setting of acute coronary syndromes (ACS) using fractional flow reserve (FFR) measurements. Quantitative flow ratio (QFR), recently introduced as angiography-based fast FFR computation, has been validated with good agreement and diagnostic performance with FFR in chronic coronary syndromes. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility and diagnostic reliability of QFR assessment during primary PC. Methods A total of 321 patients with ACS and multivessel disease, who underwent primary PCI and were planned for staged PCI of at least one non-culprit lesion were enrolled in the analysis. Within this patient cohort, serial post-hoc QFR analyses of 513 non-culprit vessels were performed. Results The median time interval between primary and staged PCI was 49 [42–58] days. QFR in non-culprit coronary arteries did not change between acute and staged measurements (0.86 vs 0.87, p = 0.114), with strong correlation (r = 0.94, p≤0.001) and good agreement (mean difference − 0.008, 95%CI -0.013-0.003) between measurements. Importantly, QFR as assessed at index procedure had sensitivity of 95.02%, specificity of 93.59% and diagnostic accuracy of 94.15% in prediction of QFR ≤ 0.80 at the time of staged PCI. Conclusions The present study for the first time confirmed the feasibility and diagnostic accuracy of non-culprit coronary artery QFR during primary PCI. These results support QFR as valuable tool in patients with ACS to detect further hemodynamic relevant lesions with excellent diagnostic performance and therefore to guide further revascularisation therapy.

scholarly journals Influence of lesion and disease subsets on the diagnostic performance of the quantitative flow ratio in real-world patients

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kwan Yong Lee ◽  
Byung-Hee Hwang ◽  
Moo Jun Kim ◽  
Eun-Ho Choo ◽  
Ik Jun Choi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Real World ◽  
Multiple Testing ◽  
Diagnostic Performance ◽  
Computational Method ◽  
Flow Ratio ◽  
Fractional Flow ◽  
Quantitative Flow Ratio ◽  
Tandem Lesions ◽  
Quantitative Flow

AbstractThe quantitative flow ratio (QFR) is a novel angiography-based computational method assessing functional ischemia caused by coronary stenosis. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of quantitative flow ratio (QFR) in patients with angina and acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and to identify the conditions with low diagnostic performance. We assessed the QFR for 1077 vessels under fractional flow ratio (FFR) evaluation in 915 patients with angina and AMI. The diagnostic accuracies of the QFR for identifying an FFR ≤ 0.8 were 95.98% (95% confidence interval [CI] 94.52 to 97.14%) for the angina group and 92.42% (95% CI 86.51 to 96.31%) for the AMI group. The diagnostic accuracy of the QFR in the borderline FFR zones (> 0.75, ≤ 0.85) (91.23% [95% CI 88.25 to 93.66%]) was significantly lower than that in others (difference: 4.32; p = 0.001). The condition accompanying both AMI and the borderline FFR zone showed the lowest QFR diagnostic accuracy in our data (83.93% [95% CI 71.67 to 92.38]). The diagnostic accuracy was reduced for tandem lesions (p = 0.04, not correcting for multiple testing). Our study found that the QFR method yielded a high overall diagnostic performance in real-world patients. However, low diagnostic accuracy has been observed in borderline FFR zones with AMI, and the hybrid FFR approach needs to be considered.

Diagnostic performance and clinical implications for enhancing a hybrid quantitative flow ratio and fractional flow reserve revascularization decision making strategy

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
J Peper ◽  
R.W Van Hamersvelt ◽  
B.J.M.W Rensing ◽  
J.P Van Kuijk ◽  
M Voskuil ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Diagnostic Performance ◽  
Hybrid Approach ◽  
High Accuracy ◽  
Intermediate Zone ◽  
Flow Ratio ◽  
Fractional Flow ◽  
Hybrid Strategy ◽  
Flow Reserve ◽  
Quantitative Flow Ratio ◽  
Quantitative Flow

Abstract Background Fractional flow reserve (FFR) adoption persists low mainly due to procedural and operator related factors as well as costs. An alternative for FFR, quantitative flow ratio (QFR) achieves a high accuracy mainly outside the intermediate zone without the need for hyperemia and wire-use. Currently, no outcome trials assess the role of QFR in the guidance of revascularization. Therefore, we evaluate a QFR-FFR hybrid strategy in which FFR is measured inside of the intermediate zone. Methods This retrospective multi-center study included consecutive patients who underwent both invasive coronary angiography and FFR in the participating centers. QFR was calculated for all vessels in which FFR was measured. Diagnostic performance of QFR was assessed using an FFR cut-off of 0.80 as reference standard. The QFR-FFR hybrid approach was modeled using the intermediate zone of 0.77 to 0.87 assuming that lesions within the intermediate zone follow the FFR binary cutoff. Results In total, 381 vessels in 289 patients were analyzed. The sensitivity, specificity and accuracy on a per vessel-based analysis were 84.6%, 86.3% and 85.6% for QFR and 91.1%, 95.3% and 93.4% for the QFR-FFR hybrid approach. The diagnostic accuracy of QFR-FFR hybrid strategy with invasive FFR measurement is 93.4% and results in a FFR reduction of 56.7%. Conclusion QFR has a good correlation and agreement with invasive FFR and a high diagnostic accuracy. A hybrid QFR-FFR approach could extend the use of QFR and reduces the proportion of invasive FFR-measurements needed while maintaining a high accuracy. Hybrid QFR-FFR strategy Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None

scholarly journals Diagnostic performance and clinical implications for enhancing a hybrid quantitative flow ratio–FFR revascularization decision-making strategy

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Joyce Peper ◽  
Robbert W. van Hamersvelt ◽  
Benno J. W. M. Rensing ◽  
Jan-Peter van Kuijk ◽  
Michiel Voskuil ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Diagnostic Performance ◽  
Invasive Coronary Angiography ◽  
Hybrid Approach ◽  
Intermediate Zone ◽  
Flow Ratio ◽  
Fractional Flow ◽  
Hybrid Strategy ◽  
Flow Reserve ◽  
Quantitative Flow Ratio ◽  
Quantitative Flow

AbstractInvasive fractional flow reserve (FFR) adoption remains low mainly due to procedural and operator related factors as well as costs. Alternatively, quantitative flow ratio (QFR) achieves a high accuracy mainly outside the intermediate zone without the need for hyperaemia and wire-use. We aimed to determine the diagnostic performance of QFR and to evaluate a QFR–FFR hybrid strategy in which FFR is measured only in the intermediate zone. This retrospective study included 289 consecutive patients who underwent invasive coronary angiography and FFR. QFR was calculated for all vessels in which FFR was measured. The QFR–FFR hybrid approach was modelled using the intermediate zone of 0.77–0.87 in which FFR-measurements are recommended. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy on a per vessel-based analysis were 84.6%, 86.3% and 85.6% for QFR and 88.0%, 92.9% and 90.3% for the QFR–FFR hybrid approach. The diagnostic accuracy of QFR–FFR hybrid strategy with invasive FFR measurement was 93.4% and resulted in a 56.7% reduction in the need for FFR. QFR has a good correlation and agreement with invasive FFR. A hybrid QFR–FFR approach could extend the use of QFR and reduces the proportion of invasive FFR-measurements needed while improving accuracy.

scholarly journals Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Performance of Contrast-Fractional Flow Reserve versus Quantitative Flow Ratio for Functional Assessment of Coronary Stenoses

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Ruitao Zhang ◽  
Jianwei Zhang ◽  
Lijun Guo
Keyword(s):  
Sensitivity And Specificity ◽  
Fractional Flow Reserve ◽  
Coronary Stenosis ◽  
Diagnostic Performance ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Flow Ratio ◽  
Fractional Flow ◽  
Flow Reserve ◽  
Quantitative Flow Ratio ◽  
Quantitative Flow

Background. Use of the fractional flow reserve (FFR) technique is recommended to evaluate coronary stenosis severity and guide revascularization. However, its high cost, time to administer, and the side effects of adenosine reduce its clinical utility. Two novel adenosine-free indices, contrast-FFR (cFFR) and quantitative flow ratio (QFR), can simplify the functional evaluation of coronary stenosis. This study aimed to analyze the diagnostic performance of cFFR and QFR using FFR as a reference index. Methods. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies in which cFFR or QFR was compared to FFR. A bivariate model was applied to pool diagnostic parameters. Cochran’s Q test and the I2 index were used to assess heterogeneity and identify the potential source of heterogeneity by metaregression and sensitivity analysis. Results. Overall, 2220 and 3000 coronary lesions from 20 studies were evaluated by cFFR and QFR, respectively. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.87 (95% CI: 0.81, 0.91) and 0.92 (95% CI: 0.88, 0.94) for cFFR and 0.87 (95% CI: 0.82, 0.91) and 0.91 (95% CI: 0.87, 0.93) for QFR, respectively. No statistical significance of sensitivity and specificity for cFFR and QFR were observed in the bivariate analysis (P=0.8406 and 0.4397, resp.). The area under summary receiver-operating curve of cFFR and QFR was 0.95 (95% CI: 0.93, 0.97) for cFFR and 0.95 (95% CI: 0.93, 0.97). Conclusion. Both cFFR and QFR have good diagnostic performance in detecting functional severity of coronary arteries and showed similar diagnostic parameters.

1268A comparison between the diagnostic performance of quantitative flow ratio and non-invasive imaging modalities for diagnosing myocardial ischemia defined by FFR, a PACIFIC-trial interim analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
P A A Van Diemen ◽  
R S Driessen ◽  
R A Kooistra ◽  
W J Stuijfzand ◽  
P G Raijmakers ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Coronary Angiography ◽  
Myocardial Ischemia ◽  
Positive Predictive Value ◽  
Flow Velocity ◽  
Predictive Value ◽  
Diagnostic Performance ◽  
Emission Tomography ◽  
Flow Ratio ◽  
Quantitative Flow Ratio ◽  
Quantitative Flow

Abstract Background Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) uses fast computational algorithms based on 3-dimensional quantitative coronary angiography and estimation of contrast flow velocity during invasive coronary angiography (ICA) to obtain QFR values equivalent to fractional flow reserve (FFR). Objective To compare the diagnostic performance of QFR with coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA), single-photon emission tomography (SPECT), and positron emission tomography (PET) for diagnosing myocardial ischemia defined by FFR. Method QFR computation was attempted in 109 patients (286 vessels without a subtotal/total lesion) of the 208 patients included in the PACIFIC-trial. Patients underwent 256-slice CCTA, Tetrofosmin SPECT, and [15O]H2O PET prior to ICA in conjunction with 3 vessel FFR measurements. ICA images were obtained without the use of a dedicated QFR acquistion protocol. QFR was calculated using a fixed empiric hyperemic flow velocity (fQFR) as well as using a patient specific flow velocity based on contrast passage through the coronary (cQFR). All analysis were performed on a per vessel level. Results Fixed QFR computation succeeded in 152 (53%) vessels while cQFR analysis was successful in 140 (49%) vessels. A good correlation between FFR and fQFR/cQFR was observed (R=0.774, p<0.001/R=0.790, p<0.001). The diagnostic performance in terms of sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value, positive predictive value, and accuracy is presented in table 1. In total, 133 vessels with matched FFR, fQFR, cQFR, CCTA, SPECT, and PET results were available for the comparative C-statistic analysis, figure 1. The diagnostic performance of fQFR and cQFR was comparable (p=0.451) and superior to CCTA (p=0.004/p=0.003), SPECT (p<0.001/p<0.001), and PET (p=0.008/p=0.006), figure 1. CCTA, and PET performed alike (p=0.568) and outperformed SPECT (p=0.023, p=0.002). Table 1 % (95% Confidence Interval) fQFR n=152 cQFR (n=140) CCTA (n=152) SPECT (n=150) PET (n=149) Sensitivity 76 (59–89) 71 (53–86) 70 (51–84) 30 (16–49) 76 (58–89) Specificity 94 (88–98) 93 (86–97) 73 (64–81) 96 (90–99) 80 (72–87) Negative Predictive Value 93 (88–96) 92 (86–95) 90 (84–94) 83 (79–86) 92 (86–96) Positive Predictive Value 79 (64–89) 74 (59–85) 42 (33–51) 67 (42–84) 52 (42–62) Accuracy 90 (84–94) 88 (81–93) 72 (65–79) 81 (74–87) 79 (72–85) Figure 1. Conclusion Fixed QFR and cQFR correlate well with FFR with a high diagnostic accuracy as result. QFR outperformed CCTA, SPECT, and PET for the diagnosis of myocardial ischemia on a per vessel basis with the important footnote that fQFR and cQFR could only be computed in 53%, and 49% of the vessels.

scholarly journals TCT-620 Influence of diabetes mellitus and chronic kidney disease on diagnostic accuracy of Quantitative Flow Ratio (QFR).

2018 ◽  
Vol 72 (13) ◽  
pp. B248
Author(s):  
Martyna Zaleska ◽  
Lukasz Koltowski ◽  
Jakub Maksym ◽  
Mariusz Tomaniak ◽  
Aleksandra Chabior ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Diabetes Mellitus ◽  
Chronic Kidney Disease ◽  
Kidney Disease ◽  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Flow Ratio ◽  
Quantitative Flow Ratio ◽  
Quantitative Flow

Quantitative flow ratio to predict non-target-vessel-related events at 5 years in STEMI patients undergoing angiography-guided revascularization

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
S Baer ◽  
R Kavaliauskaite ◽  
Y Ueki ◽  
T Otsuka ◽  
T Engstrom ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Primary Endpoint ◽  
Cardiac Death ◽  
Complete Revascularization ◽  
Primary Pci ◽  
Target Vessel ◽  
Flow Ratio ◽  
Incremental Value ◽  
Quantitative Flow Ratio ◽  
Quantitative Flow

Abstract Background In patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), angiography-based complete revascularization is associated with superior outcomes compared with culprit-lesion-only percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Quantitative Flow Ratio (QFR) is a novel, non-invasive, vasodilator-free method to assess the hemodynamic significance of coronary stenoses. Purpose To investigate the incremental value of QFR over angiography alone in the assessment of non-culprit lesions (NCL) in STEMI patients undergoing primary PCI. Methods In the randomized, multicenter COMFORTABLE AMI trial, STEMI patients underwent angiography-guided complete revascularization. QFR was determined in untreated non-target vessels by assessors blinded for clinical outcomes. Results Out of 1161 STEMI patients, 946 vessels in 617 patients could be analyzed by QFR. At 5-year follow-up, the rate of the primary endpoint cardiac death, non-target vessel myocardial infarction (non-TV-MI) and clinically indicated, non-target vessel revascularization (non-TVR) was significantly higher in patients with QFR ≤0.80 compared with QFR &gt;0.80 (62.9% vs. 12.7%, HR 7.20, 95% CI 4.46–11.62, p&lt;0.001), driven by higher rates of non-TV-MI (15.4% vs. 3.6%, HR 4.59, 95% CI 1.72–12.23, p=0.002) and non-TVR (58.6% vs. 7.7%, HR 10.99, 95% CI 6.39–18.91, p&lt;0.001). No significant differences for cardiac death were observed. Multivariate analysis identified QFR ≤0.80, MI SYNTAX score and left ventricular function as independent predictors of the primary endpoint. QFR ≤0.80 showed an accuracy of 86.1%, sensitivity of 23.2%, specificity of 97.5%, positive predictive value of 62.9% and negative predictive value of 87.5% for the prediction of the primary endpoint. Conclusions Our study results suggest incremental value of QFR over angiography-guided PCI for NCL among STEMI patients undergoing primary PCI. Kaplan-Meier curves of primary endpoint Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None

scholarly journals Functional classification discordance in intermediate coronary stenoses between fractional flow reserve and angiography-based quantitative flow ratio

Open Heart ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. e001179 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yoshinori Kanno ◽  
Masahiro Hoshino ◽  
Rikuta Hamaya ◽  
Tomoyo Sugiyama ◽  
Yoshihisa Kanaji ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Fractional Flow Reserve ◽  
Coronary Flow ◽  
Microvascular Function ◽  
Grey Zone ◽  
Flow Ratio ◽  
Fractional Flow ◽  
Flow Reserve ◽  
Quantitative Flow Ratio ◽  
Quantitative Flow

BackgroundMeasurement of the contrast-flow quantitative flow ratio (cQFR) is a novel method for rapid computational estimation of fractional flow reserve (FFR). Discordance between FFR and cQFR has not been completely characterised.MethodsWe performed a post-hoc analysis of 504 vessels with angiographically intermediate stenosis in 504 patients who underwent measurement of FFR, coronary flow reserve (CFR), the index of microcirculatory resistance (IMR) and Duke jeopardy score.ResultsIn total, 396 (78.6%) and 108 (21.4%) lesions showed concordant and discordant FFR and cQFR functional classifications, respectively. Among lesions with a reduced FFR (FFR+), those with a preserved cQFR (cQFR−) showed significantly lower IMR, shorter mean transit time (Tmn), shorter lesion length (all, p<0.01) and similar CFR and Duke jeopardy scores compared with lesions showing a reduced cQFR (cQFR+). Furthermore, lesions with FFR+ and cQFR− had significantly lower IMR and shorter Tmn compared with lesions showing a preserved FFR (FFR−) and cQFR+. Of note, in cQFR+ lesions, higher IMR lesions were associated with decreased diagnostic accuracy (high-IMR; 63.0% and low-IMR; 75.8%, p<0.01). In contrast, in cQFR− lesions, lower IMR lesions was associated with decreased diagnostic accuracy (high-IMR group; 96.8% and low-IMR group; 80.0%, p<0.01). Notably, in total, 31 territories (6.2%; ‘jump out’ group) had an FFR above the upper limit of the grey zone (>0.80) and a cQFR below the lower limit (≤0.75). In contrast, five territories (1.0%; ‘jump in’ group) exhibited opposite results (FFR of ≤0.75 and cQFR of >0.80). The ‘jump out’ territories showed significantly higher IMR values than ‘jump in’ territories (p<0.01).ConclusionsFFR− with cQFR+ is associated with increased microvascular resistance, and FFR+ with cQFR− showed preservation of microvascular function with high coronary flow. Microvascular function affected diagnostic performance of cQFR in relation to functional stenosis significance.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document