scholarly journals 448 Comparison of quantitative flow ratio, Pd/Pa, and diastolic hyperaemia-free ratio vs. fractional flow reserve in non-culprit lesion of patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction

2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (Supplement_G) ◽  
Author(s):  
Matteo Tebaldi ◽  
Simone Biscaglia ◽  
Andrea Erriquez ◽  
Carlo Penzo ◽  
Carlo Tumscitz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Flow Ratio ◽  
Culprit Lesion ◽  
Fractional Flow ◽  
St Segment Elevation ◽  
Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Flow Reserve ◽  
St Segment ◽  
Quantitative Flow Ratio

Abstract Aims To investigate the correlation between quantitative flow ratio (QFR), Pd/Pa, diastolic hyperaemia-free ratio (DFR), and fractional flow reserve (FFR, gold standard) in non-culprit lesion (NCL) of patients with non ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI). The non-hyperemic pressure ratio (NHPR) and the angiography-based indexes have been developed to overcome the limitation of the use of the FFR. Methods and results Between January and December 2019, 184 NCL from 116 NSTEMI patients underwent physiologic assessment and were included in the study. NCLs were investigated with QFR, Pd/Pa, DFR, and FFR. Mean values of QFR, Pd/Pa, DFR, and FFR were 0.85 ± 0.10, 0.92 ± 0.07, 0.93 ± 0.05, and 0.84 ± 0.07, respectively. DFR and FFR showed a good correlation (r = 0.76). Bland and Altman plot showed a mean difference of 0.080. DFR diagnostic accuracy was 88%. The area under the ROC curve (AUC) for DFR was 0.946 (95% CI: 0.90–0.97, P = 0.0001). Similar findings were reported for Pd/Pa [r = 0.73; mean difference 0.095, diagnostic accuracy 84%, AUC 0.909 (95% CI: 0.85–0.94, P = 0.0001)] and QFR [r = 0.68; mean difference: 0.01; diagnostic accuracy: 88%, AUC: 0.964 (95% CI: 0.91–0.98, P = 0.0001)]. FFR, QFR, Pd/Pa, and DFR identified 31%, 32%, 30%, and 32% potentially flow-limiting lesions, respectively. Conclusions In NSTEMI patients, QFR, Pd/Pa, and DFR showed equivalence as compared to gold standard FFR in the discrimination of non-culprit lesions requiring revascularization.

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