Diagnostic performance of quantitative flow ratio in prospectively enrolled patients: An individual patient‐data meta‐analysis

Impact of Relative Improvement in Quantitative Flow Ratio on Clinical Outcomes After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention - A Subanalysis of the PANDA III Trial

BACKGROUND

The clinical impact of relative improvements in coronary physiology in patients receiving percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for coronary artery disease (CAD) remains undetermined.Methods and Results: The quantitative flow ratio (QFR) recovery ratio (QRR) was calculated in 1,424 vessels in the PANDA III trial as (post-PCI QFR-pre-PCI QFR)/(1-pre-PCI QFR). The primary endpoint was the 2-year vessel-oriented composite endpoint (VOCE; a composite of vessel-related cardiac death, vessel-related non-procedural myocardial infarction, and ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization). Study vessels were dichotomously stratified according to the optimal QRR cut-off value. During the 2-year follow-up, 41 (2.9%) VOCEs occurred. Low (<0.86) QRR was associated with significantly higher rates of 2-year VOCEs than high (≥0.86) QRR (6.6% vs. 1.4%; adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 5.05; 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.53-10.08; P<0.001). Notably, among vessels with satisfactory post-procedural physiological results (post-PCI QFR >0.89), low QRR also conferred an increased risk of 2-year VOCEs (3.7% vs. 1.4%; aHR 3.01; 95% CI 1.30-6.94; P=0.010). Significantly better discriminant and reclassification performance was observed after integrating risk stratification by QRR and post-PCI QFR to clinical risk factors (area under the curve 0.80 vs. 0.71 [P=0.010]; integrated discrimination improvement 0.05 [P<0.001]; net reclassification index 0.64 [P<0.001]).

CONCLUSIONS

Relative improvement of coronary physiology assessed by QRR showed applicability in prognostication. Categorical classification of coronary physiology could provide information for risk stratification of CAD patients.

Quantitative flow ratio versus fractional flow reserve for Heart Team decision-making in multivessel disease: the randomised, multicentre DECISION QFR trial

BACKGROUND

Vessel-level physiological data derived from pressure wire measurements are one of the important determinant factors in the optimal revascularisation strategy for patients with multivessel disease (MVD). However, these may result in complications and a prolonged procedure time.

AIMS

The feasibility of using the quantitative flow ratio (QFR), an angiography-derived fractional flow reserve (FFR), in Heart Team discussions to determine the optimal revascularisation strategy for patients with MVD was investigated.

METHODS

Two Heart Teams were randomly assigned either QFR- or FFR-based data of the included patients. They then discussed the optimal revascularisation mode (percutaneous coronary intervention [PCI] or coronary artery bypass grafting [CABG]) for each patient and made treatment recommendations. The primary endpoint of the trial was the level of agreement between the treatment recommendations of both teams as assessed using Cohen's kappa.

RESULTS

The trial included 248 patients with MVD from 10 study sites. Cohen's kappa in the recommended revascularisation modes between the QFR and FFR approaches was 0.73 [95% confidence interval {CI} : 0.62-0.83]. As for the revascularisation planning, agreements in the target vessels for PCI and CABG were substantial for both revascularisation modes (Cohen's kappa=0.72 [95% CI: 0.66-0.78] and 0.72 [95% CI: 0.66-0.78], respectively). The team assigned to the QFR approach provided consistent recommended revascularisation modes even after being made aware of the FFR data (Cohen's kappa=0.95 [95% CI:0.90-1.00]).

CONCLUSIONS

QFR provided feasible physiological data in Heart Team discussions to determine the optimal revascularisation strategy for MVD. The QFR and FFR approaches agreed substantially in terms of treatment recommendations.

Diagnostic performance of ultrasonic flow ratio versus quantitative flow ratio for assessment of coronary stenosis

BACKGROUND

Ultrasonic flow ratio (UFR) is a novel intravascular ultrasound (IVUS)-derived modality for fast computation of fractional flow reserve (FFR) without pressure wires and adenosine.

AIMS

This study was sought to compare the diagnostic performance of UFR and quantitative flow ratio (QFR), using FFR as the reference standard.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study enrolling consecutive patients with intermediate coronary artery lesions (diameter stenosis of 30%-90% by visual estimation) for IVUS and FFR measurement. UFR and QFR were performed offline in a core-lab by independent analysts blinded to FFR.

RESULTS

From December 2022 to May 2023, a total of 78 eligible patients were enrolled. IVUS and FFR measurements were successfully conducted in 104 vessels, finally 98 vessels with both FFR, UFR and QFR evaluation were analyzed. Mean FFR was 0.79 ± 0.12. UFR showed a strong correlation with FFR similar to QFR (r = 0.83 vs. 0.82, p = 0.795). Diagnostic accuracy of UFR was non-inferior to QFR (94% [89%-97%] versus 90% [84%-94%], p = 0.113). Sensitivity and specificity in identifying hemodynamically significant stenosis were comparable between UFR and QFR (sensitivity: 89% [79%-96%] versus 85% [74%-92%], p = 0.453; specificity: 97% [91%-99%] versus 95% [88%-99%], p = 0.625). The area under curve for UFR was 0.95 [0.90-0.98], non-inferior to QFR (difference = 0.021, p = 0.293), and significantly higher than minimum lumen area (MLA; difference = 0.13, p < 0.001). Diagnostic accuracy of UFR and QFR was not statically different in bifurcation nor non-bifurcation lesions.

CONCLUSIONS

UFR showed excellent concordance with FFR, non-inferior to QFR, superior to MLA. UFR provides a potentiality for the integration of physiological assessment and intravascular imaging in clinical practice.

Consensus document on the clinical application of invasive functional coronary angiography from the Japanese Association of Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics

Invasive functional coronary angiography (FCA), an angiography-derived physiological index of the functional significance of coronary obstruction, is a novel physiological assessment tool for coronary obstruction that does not require the utilization of a pressure wire. This technology enables operators to rapidly evaluate the functional relevance of coronary stenoses during and even after angiography while reducing the burden of cost and complication risks related to the pressure wire. FCA can be used for treatment decision-making for revascularization, strategy planning for percutaneous coronary intervention, and procedure optimization. Currently, various software-computing FCAs are available worldwide, with unique features in their computation algorithms and functions. With the emerging application of this novel technology in various clinical scenarios, the Japanese Association of Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics task force was created to outline expert consensus on the clinical use of FCA. This consensus document advocates optimal clinical applications of FCA according to currently available evidence while summarizing the concept, history, limitations, and future perspectives of FCA along with globally available software.

Head-to-head comparison of two angiography-derived fractional flow reserve techniques in patients with high-risk acute coronary syndrome: A multicenter prospective study

BACKGROUND

FFRangio and QFR are angiography-based technologies that have been validated in patients with stable coronary artery disease. No head-to-head comparison to invasive fractional flow reserve (FFR) has been reported to date in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS).

METHODS

This study is a subset of a larger prospective multicenter, single-arm study that involved patients diagnosed with high-risk ACS in whom 30-70% stenosis was evaluated by FFR. FFRangio and QFR - both calculated offline by 2 different and blinded operators - were calculated and compared to FFR. The two co-primary endpoints were the comparison of the Pearson correlation coefficient between FFRangio and QFR with FFR and the comparison of their inter-observer variability.

RESULTS

Among 134 high-risk ACS screened patients, 59 patients with 84 vessels underwent FFR measurements and were included in this study. The mean FFR value was 0.82 ± 0.40 with 32 (38%) being ≤0.80. The mean FFRangio was 0.82 ± 0.20 and the mean QFR was 0.82 ± 0.30, with 27 (32%) and 25 (29%) being ≤0.80, respectively. The Pearson correlation coefficient was significantly better for FFRangio compared to QFR, with R values of 0.76 and 0.61, respectively (p = 0.01). The inter-observer agreement was also significantly better for FFRangio compared to QFR (0.86 vs 0.79, p < 0.05). FFRangio had 91% sensitivity, 100% specificity, and 96.8% accuracy, while QFR exhibited 86.4% sensitivity, 98.4% specificity, and 93.7% accuracy.

CONCLUSION

In patients with high-risk ACS, FFRangio and QFR demonstrated excellent diagnostic performance. FFRangio seems to have better correlation to invasive FFR compared to QFR but further larger validation studies are required.

Intravascular Imaging-Derived Physiology-Basic Principles and Clinical Application

Intravascular imaging-derived physiology is emerging as a promising tool allowing simultaneous anatomic and functional lesion assessment. Recently, several optical coherence tomography-based and intravascular ultrasound-based fractional flow reserve (FFR) indices have been developed that compute FFR through computational fluid dynamics, fluid dynamics equations, or machine-learning methods. This review aims to provide an overview of the currently available intravascular imaging-based physiologic indices, their diagnostic performance, and clinical application.

Development and validation of a model integrating clinical and coronary lesion-based functional assessment for long-term risk prediction in PCI patients

OBJECTIVES

To establish a scoring system combining the ACEF score and the quantitative blood flow ratio (QFR) to improve the long-term risk prediction of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

METHODS

In this population-based cohort study, a total of 46 features, including patient clinical and coronary lesion characteristics, were assessed for analysis through machine learning models. The ACEF-QFR scoring system was developed using 1263 consecutive cases of CAD patients after PCI in PANDA III trial database. The newly developed score was then validated on the other remaining 542 patients in the cohort.

RESULTS

In both the Random Forest Model and the DeepSurv Model, age, renal function (creatinine), cardiac function (LVEF) and post-PCI coronary physiological index (QFR) were identified and confirmed to be significant predictive factors for 2-year adverse cardiac events. The ACEF-QFR score was constructed based on the developmental dataset and computed as age (years)/EF (%) + 1 (if creatinine ≥ 2.0 mg/dL) + 1 (if post-PCI QFR ≤ 0.92). The performance of the ACEF-QFR scoring system was preliminarily evaluated in the developmental dataset, and then further explored in the validation dataset. The ACEF-QFR score showed superior discrimination (C-statistic = 0.651; 95% CI: 0.611-0.691, P < 0.05 versus post-PCI physiological index and other commonly used risk scores) and excellent calibration (Hosmer-Lemeshow χ2 = 7.070; P = 0.529) for predicting 2-year patient-oriented composite endpoint (POCE). The good prognostic value of the ACEF-QFR score was further validated by multivariable Cox regression and Kaplan-Meier analysis (adjusted HR = 1.89; 95% CI: 1.18-3.04; log-rank P < 0.01) after stratified the patients into high-risk group and low-risk group.

CONCLUSIONS

An improved scoring system combining clinical and coronary lesion-based functional variables (ACEF-QFR) was developed, and its ability for prognostic prediction in patients with PCI was further validated to be significantly better than the post-PCI physiological index and other commonly used risk scores.

Assessment of Angiography-Based Renal Quantitative Flow Ratio Measurement in Patients with Atherosclerotic Renal Artery Stenosis

Background

Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) is an angiography-based fractional flow reserve measurement without pressure wire or induction of hyperemia. A recent innovation that uses combined geometrical data and hemodynamic boundary conditions to measure QFR from a single angiographic view has shown the potential to measure QFR of the renal artery-renal QFR (rQFR).

Objective

The aim of this pilot study was to assess the feasibility of rQFR measurement and the contribution of rQFR in selecting patients with atherosclerotic renal artery stenosis (ARAS) undergoing revascularization.

Methods

This retrospective trial enrolled patients who had ARAS (50-90%) and hypertension. The enrolled patients were treated by optimal antihypertensive medication or revascularization, respectively, and the therapeutic strategies were based on rFFR measurement and/or clinical feature.

Results

A total of 55 patients underwent rQFR measurement. Among the enrolled patients, 18 underwent optimal antihypertensive medication and 37 underwent revascularization, 19 patients in whom rQFR and rFFR were both assessed. During the 180-day follow-up, 25 patients saw an improvement in their blood pressure among the 37 patients that underwent revascularization. ROC analysis revealed that rQFR had a high diagnostic accuracy for predicting blood pressure improvement (AUCrQFR = 0.932, 95% CI 0.798-0.998). The ideal cut-off value of rQFR for predicting blood pressure improvement after revascularization is ≤0.72 (sensitivity: 72.00%, specificity: 100%). The paired t test and Bland-Altman analyses demonstrated good agreement between rQFR and rFFR (t = 1.887, 95% CI -0.021 to 0.001, 95% limits of agreement: -0.035 to 0.055, p = 0.075). The Spearman correlation test reveals that there was a significant positive correlation between rQFR and rFFR (r = 0.952, 95% CI 0.874 to 0.982, p < 0.001).

Conclusion

The rQFR has the potential to enhance the ability of angiography to detect functionally significant renal artery stenosis during angiography and to produce results that are comparable to invasive hemodynamic assessment.

Risk of bias assessments in individual participant data meta-analyses of test accuracy and prediction models: a review shows improvements are needed

OBJECTIVES

Risk of bias assessments are important in meta-analyses of both aggregate and individual participant data (IPD). There is limited evidence on whether and how risk of bias of included studies or datasets in IPD meta-analyses (IPDMAs) is assessed. We review how risk of bias is currently assessed, reported, and incorporated in IPDMAs of test accuracy and clinical prediction model studies and provide recommendations for improvement.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

We searched PubMed (January 2018-May 2020) to identify IPDMAs of test accuracy and prediction models, then elicited whether each IPDMA assessed risk of bias of included studies and, if so, how assessments were reported and subsequently incorporated into the IPDMAs.

RESULTS

Forty-nine IPDMAs were included. Nineteen of 27 (70%) test accuracy IPDMAs assessed risk of bias, compared to 5 of 22 (23%) prediction model IPDMAs. Seventeen of 19 (89%) test accuracy IPDMAs used Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2), but no tool was used consistently among prediction model IPDMAs. Of IPDMAs assessing risk of bias, 7 (37%) test accuracy IPDMAs and 1 (20%) prediction model IPDMA provided details on the information sources (e.g., the original manuscript, IPD, primary investigators) used to inform judgments, and 4 (21%) test accuracy IPDMAs and 1 (20%) prediction model IPDMA provided information or whether assessments were done before or after obtaining the IPD of the included studies or datasets. Of all included IPDMAs, only seven test accuracy IPDMAs (26%) and one prediction model IPDMA (5%) incorporated risk of bias assessments into their meta-analyses. For future IPDMA projects, we provide guidance on how to adapt tools such as Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool (for prediction models) and QUADAS-2 (for test accuracy) to assess risk of bias of included primary studies and their IPD.

CONCLUSION

Risk of bias assessments and their reporting need to be improved in IPDMAs of test accuracy and, especially, prediction model studies. Using recommended tools, both before and after IPD are obtained, will address this.

The diagnostic performance of quantitative flow ratio and perfusion imaging in patients with prior coronary artery disease

AIMS

In chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) patients with documented coronary artery disease (CAD), ischaemia detection by myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) and an invasive approach are viable diagnostic strategies. We compared the diagnostic performance of quantitative flow ratio (QFR) with single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), positron emission tomography (PET), and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) in patients with prior CAD [previous percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and/or myocardial infarction (MI)].

METHODS AND RESULTS

This PACIFIC-2 sub-study evaluated 189 CCS patients with prior CAD for inclusion. Patients underwent SPECT, PET, and CMR followed by invasive coronary angiography with fractional flow reserve (FFR) measurements of all major coronary arteries (N = 567), except for vessels with a sub-total or chronic total occlusion. Quantitative flow ratio computation was attempted in 488 (86%) vessels with measured FFR available (FFR ≤0.80 defined haemodynamically significant CAD). Quantitative flow ratio analysis was successful in 334 (68%) vessels among 166 patients and demonstrated a higher accuracy (84%) and sensitivity (72%) compared with SPECT (66%, P < 0.001 and 46%, P = 0.001), PET (65%, P < 0.001 and 58%, P = 0.032), and CMR (72%, P < 0.001 and 33%, P < 0.001). The specificity of QFR (87%) was similar to that of CMR (83%, P = 0.123) but higher than that of SPECT (71%, P < 0.001) and PET (67%, P < 0.001). Lastly, QFR exhibited a higher area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (0.89) than SPECT (0.57, P < 0.001), PET (0.66, P < 0.001), and CMR (0.60, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

QFR correlated better with FFR in patients with prior CAD than MPI, as reflected in the higher diagnostic performance measures for detecting FFR-defined, vessel-specific, significant CAD.

Rationale and design of a comparison of angiography-derived fractional flow reserve-guided and intravascular ultrasound-guided intervention strategy for clinical outcomes in patients with coronary artery disease: a randomised controlled trial (FLAVOUR II)

INTRODUCTION

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) guided by coronary angiography-derived fractional flow reserve (FFR) or intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) has shown improved clinical outcomes compared with angiography-only-guided PCI. In patients with intermediate stenoses, FFR resulted in fewer coronary interventions and was non-inferior to IVUS with respect to clinical outcomes. However, whether this finding can be applied to angiography-derived FFR in significant coronary artery disease (CAD) remains unclear.

METHOD AND ANALYSIS

The comparison of angiography-derived FFR-guided and IVUS-guided intervention strategies for clinical outcomes in patients with coronary artery disease (FLAVOUR II) trial is a multicentre, prospective, randomised controlled trial. A total of 1872 patients with angiographically significant CAD (stenoses of at least 50% as estimated visually through angiography) in a major epicardial coronary artery will be randomised 1:1 to receive either angiography-derived FFR-guided or IVUS-guided PCI. Patients will be treated with second-generation drug-eluting stent according to the predefined criteria for revascularisation: angiography-derived FFR≤0.8 and minimal lumen area (MLA)≤3 mm2 or 3 mm270%. The primary endpoint is a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction and revascularisation at 12 months after randomisation. We will test the non-inferiority of the angiography-derived FFR-guided strategy compared with the IVUS-guided decision for PCI and the stent optimisation strategy.The FLAVOUR II trial will provide new insights into optimal evaluation and treatment strategies for patients with CAD.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

FLAVOUR II was approved by the institutional review board at each participating site (The Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine Approval No: 2020LSYD410) and will be conducted in line with the Declaration of Helsinki. Informed consent would be obtained from each patient before their participation. The study results will be submitted to a scientific journal.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04397211.

The Differences of Quantitative Flow Ratio in Coronary Artery Stenosis with or without Atrial Fibrillation

Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) is a new method for the assessment of the extent of coronary artery stenosis. But it may be obscured by the cardiac remodeling and abnormal blood flow of the coronary artery when encountering atrial fibrillation (AF). The present study aimed to examine the impact of these changed structures and blood flow of coronary arteries on QFR results in AF patients. Methods and Results. We evaluated QFR in 223 patients (112 patients with AF; 111 non-AF patients served as controls) who had undergone percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) due to severe stenoses in coronary arteries. QFR of the target coronary was determined according to the flow rate of the contrast agent. Results showed that AF patients had significantly higher QFR values than control (0.792 ± 0.118 vs. 0.685 ± 0.167, p < 0.001). We further analyzed local QFR around the stenoses (0.858 ± 0.304 vs. 0.756 ± 0.146, p=0.002), residual QFR (0.958 ± 0.055 vs. 0.929 ± 0.093, p=0.005), and index QFR (0.807 ± 0.108 vs. 0.713 ± 0.152, p < 0.001) in these two groups of patients with and without AF. Further analysis revealed that QFR in AF patients was negatively correlated with coronary flow velocity (R = -0.22, p=0.02) and area of stenosis (R = -0.70, p < 0.001) but positively correlated with the minimum lumen area (MLA) (R = 0.47, p < 0.001). Conclusion. AF patients with coronary artery stenosis have higher QFR values, which are associated with decreased blood flow velocity, smaller stenosis, and larger MLA in AF patients upon cardiac remodeling.

Coronary Artery Stenosis Evaluation by Angiography-Derived FFR: Validation by Positron Emission Tomography and Invasive Thermodilution

BACKGROUND

Fractional flow reserve (FFR) derived from invasive coronary angiography (QFR) is promising for evaluation of intermediate coronary artery stenosis.

OBJECTIVES

The authors aimed to compare the diagnostic performance of QFR and the guideline-recommended invasive FFR using 82Rubidium positron emission tomography (82Rb-PET) myocardial perfusion imaging as reference standard.

METHODS

This is a prospective, observational study of symptomatic patients with suspected obstructive coronary artery disease on coronary computed tomography angiography (≥50% diameter stenosis in ≥1 vessel). All patients were referred to 82Rb-PET and invasive coronary angiography with FFR and QFR assessment of all intermediate (30%-90% diameter stenosis) stenoses. Main analyses included a comparison of the ability of QFR and FFR to identify reduced myocardial blood flow (<2 mL/g/min) during vasodilation and/or relative perfusion abnormalities (summed stress score ≥4 in ≥2 adjacent segments).

RESULTS

A total of 250 patients (320 vessels) with indication for invasive physiological assessment were included. The continuous relationship of 82Rb-PET stress myocardial blood flow per 0.10 increase in FFR was +0.14 mL/g/min (95% CI: 0.07-0.21 mL/g/min) and +0.08 mL/g/min (95% CI: 0.02-0.14 mL/g/min) per 0.10 QFR increase. Using 82Rb-PET as reference, QFR and FFR had similar diagnostic performance on both a per-patient level (accuracy: 73%; 95% CI: 67%-79%; vs accuracy: 71%; 95% CI: 64%-78%) and per-vessel level (accuracy: 70%; 95% CI: 64%-75%; vs accuracy: 68%; 95% CI: 62%-73%). The per-vessel feasibility was 84% (95% CI: 80%-88%) for QFR and 88% (95% CI: 85%-92%) for FFR by intention-to-diagnose analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

With 82Rb-PET as reference modality, the wire-free QFR solution showed similar diagnostic accuracy as invasive FFR in evaluation of intermediate coronary stenosis. (DAN-NICAD - Danish Study of Non-Invasive Diagnostic Testing in Coronary Artery Disease; NCT02264717).

Fast Computational Approaches to Derive Fractional Pressure Ratio in Patients with Extracranial or Intracranial Symptomatic Stenosis

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to evaluate the performance of fast and straightforward Murray law-based quantitative flow ratio (μQFR) computation in cerebrovascular stenosis.

METHODS

A total of 30 patients with symptomatic stenosis of 50%-70% luminal stenosis and underwent fractional pressure ratio (FPR) assessment at our hospital were included in the present study. μQFR was applied to the interrogated vessel. An artificial intelligence algorithm was proposed for automatic delineation of lumen contours of cerebrovascular stenosis. We used invasive FPRs as a reference standard. Pearson's correlation coefficient (r) was used to assess the correlation strength between the μQFR and FPR, and Bland-Altman plots were used to evaluate the agreement between the μQFR and FPR. An analysis of the receiver operating characteristic was used to evaluate the performance of μQFR.

RESULTS

Our results displayed a strong positive correlations (r = 0.92; P < 0.001) between the μQFR and pressure wire FPR. Excellent agreement was observed between the μQFR and FPR with a mean difference of 0.01 ± 0.08 (range, -0.16 to 0.14; P = 0.263). The overall accuracy for identifying an FPR of ≤0.7 was 92% (95% confidence interval [CI], 85%-100%). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was higher for the μQFR (0.92; 95% CI, 0.81-0.98) than for diameter stenosis (0.88; 95% CI, 0.75-0.95). The positive likelihood ratio was 3.9 for the μQFR with a negative likelihood ratio of 0.

CONCLUSIONS

The μQFR computation has a strong correlation and agrees with the FPR calculated from the pressure wire. Therefore, the μQFR might provide an essential therapeutic aid for patients with symptomatic stenosis.

Prognostic value of quantitative flow ratio in patients with coronary heart disease after percutaneous coronary intervention therapy: a meta-analysis

Background

Coronary atherosclerotic heart disease is one of the most serious health and life-threatening diseases. There is no doubt that despite the increasing number of assessment methods used clinically, the prognosis assessment is still not ideal, and newer assessment methods are needed.

Objective

To investigate the predictive value of quantitative flow ratio (QFR) for adverse events (vessel-oriented composite endpoint events/target lesion failure) in patients after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

Method

Eight studies involving 4,173 patients (5,688 vascular lesions) were included. These are studies on the relationship between QFR values and prognosis of adverse cardiac events after PCI. This meta-analysis was performed after quality assessment and data extraction of clinical trials data that met the inclusion criteria.

Result

Each of the eight studies described the cut-off values for the best predictive ability of post-PCI QFR and the hazard ratio (HR) between QFR values and adverse events, respectively. The pooled HR of these studies was 4.72 (95% CI: 3.29-6.75). Concurrently, lower post-PCI QFR values were associated with the occurrence of individual clinical events (cardiac death/myocardial infarction/target vessel revascularization), with relative risk values of 6.51 (95% CI: 4.96-8.53), 4.83 (95% CI: 3.08-7.57), and 4.21 (95% CI: 2.66-6.68), respectively.

Conclusion

QFR may have great potential in the assessment of prognosis. It is necessary to measure QFR value after PCI. A lower QFR value after PCI was an important predictor for experiencing adverse events.

Fractional flow reserve or 3D-quantitative-coronary-angiography based vessel-FFR guided revascularization. Rationale and study design of the prospective randomized fast III trial

BACKGROUND

Physiological assessment of intermediate coronary lesions to guide coronary revascularization is currently recommended by international guidelines. Vessel fractional flow reserve (vFFR) has emerged as a new approach to derive fractional flow reserve (FFR) from 3D-quantitative coronary angiography (3D-QCA) without the need for hyperemic agents or pressure wires.

STUDY DESIGN AND OBJECTIVES

The FAST III is an investigator-initiated, open label, multicenter randomized trial comparing vFFR guided versus FFR guided coronary revascularization in approximately 2228 patients with intermediate coronary lesions (defined as 30%-80% stenosis by visual assessment or QCA). Intermediate lesions are physiologically assessed using on-line vFFR or FFR and treated if vFFR or FFR ≤0.80. The primary end point is a composite of all-cause death, any myocardial infarction, or any revascularization at 1-year post-randomization. Secondary end points include the individual components of the primary end point and cost-effectiveness will be investigated.

CONCLUSIONS

FAST III is the first randomized trial to explore whether a vFFR guided revascularization strategy is non-inferior to an FFR guided strategy in terms of clinical outcomes at 1-year follow-up in patients with intermediate coronary artery lesions.

The effects of cardiac structure, valvular regurgitation, and left ventricular diastolic dysfunction on the diagnostic accuracy of Murray law-based quantitative flow ratio

Objective

The study aimed to investigate the diagnostic accuracy of Murray law-based quantitative flow ratio (μQFR) from a single angiographic view in patients with abnormal cardiac structure, left ventricular diastolic dysfunction, and valvular regurgitation.

Background

μQFR is a novel fluid dynamics method for deriving fractional flow reserve (FFR). In addition, current studies of μQFR mainly analyzed patients with normal cardiac structure and function. The accuracy of μQFR when patients had abnormal cardiac structure, left ventricular diastolic dysfunction, and valvular regurgitation has not been clear.

Methods

This study retrospectively analyzed 261 patients with 286 vessels that underwent both FFR and μQFR prior to intervention. The cardiac structure and function were measured using echocardiography. Pressure wire-derived FFR ≤0.80 was defined as hemodynamically significant coronary stenosis.

Results

μQFR had a moderate correlation with FFR (r = 0.73, p < 0.001), and the Bland-Altman plot presented no difference between the μQFR and FFR (0.006 ± 0.075, p = 0.192). With FFR as the standard, the diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of μQFR were 94.06% (90.65-96.50), 82.56% (72.87-89.90), 99.00% (96.44-99.88), 97.26 (89.91-99.30), and 92.96% (89.29-95.44), respectively. The concordance of μQFR/FFR was not associated with abnormal cardiac structure, valvular regurgitation (aortic valve, mitral valve, and tricuspid valve), and left ventricular diastolic function. Coronary hemodynamics showed no difference between normality and abnormality of cardiac structure and left ventricular diastolic function. Coronary hemodynamics demonstrated no difference among valvular regurgitation (none, mild, moderate, or severe).

Conclusion

μQFR showed an excellent agreement with FFR. The effect of abnormal cardiac structure, valvular regurgitation, and left ventricular diastolic function did not correlate with the diagnostic accuracy of μQFR. Coronary hemodynamics showed no difference in patients with abnormal cardiac structure, valvular regurgitation, and left ventricular diastolic function.

Accuracy of the angiography-based quantitative flow ratio in intermediate left main coronary artery lesions and comparison with visual estimation

BACKGROUND

Revascularization of left main coronary artery (LMCA) stenosis is mostly based on angiography. Indices based on angiography might increase accuracy of the decision, although they have been scarcely used in LMCA. The objective of this study is to study the diagnostic agreement of QFR (quantitative flow ratio) with wire-based fractional flow reserve (FFR) in LMCA lesions and to compare with visual severity assessment.

METHODS

In a series of patients with invasive FFR assessment of intermediate LMCA stenoses we retrospectively compared the measured value of QFR with that of FFR and the estimate of significance from angiography.

RESULTS

107 QFR studies were included. The QFR intra-observer and inter-observer agreement was 87% and 82% respectively. The mean QFR-FFR difference was 0.047 ± 0.05 with a concordance of 90.7%, sensitivity 88.1%, specificity 92.3%, positive predictive value 88.1% and negative predictive value 92.3%. All these values were superior to those observed with the visual estimation which showed an intra- and inter-observer agreement of 73% and 72% respectively, besides 78% with the FFR value. The low diagnostic performance of the visual estimation and the acceptable performance of the QFR index measurement were observed in all subgroups analysed.

CONCLUSIONS

QFR allows an acceptable estimate of the FFR obtained with intracoronary pressure guidewire in intermediate LMCA lesions, and clearly superior to the assessment based on angiography alone. The decision to revascularize patients with moderate LMCA lesions should not be based solely on the degree of angiographic stenosis.

Quantitative flow ratio versus fractional flow reserve for guiding percutaneous coronary intervention: design and rationale of the randomised FAVOR III Europe Japan trial

Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) is a computation of fractional flow reserve (FFR) based on invasive coronary angiographic images. Calculating QFR is less invasive than measuring FFR and may be associated with lower costs. Current evidence supports the call for an adequately powered randomised comparison of QFR and FFR for the evaluation of intermediate coronary stenosis. The aim of the FAVOR III Europe Japan trial is to investigate if a QFR-based diagnostic strategy yields a non-inferior 12-month clinical outcome compared with a standard FFR-guided strategy in the evaluation of patients with intermediary coronary stenosis. FAVOR III Europe Japan is an investigator-initiated, randomised, clinical outcome, non-inferiority trial scheduled to randomise 2,000 patients with either 1) stable angina pectoris and intermediate coronary stenosis, or 2) indications for functional assessment of at least 1 non-culprit lesion after acute myocardial infarction. Up to 40 international centres will randomise patients to either a QFR-based or a standard FFR-based diagnostic strategy. The primary endpoint of major adverse cardiovascular events is a composite of all-cause mortality, any myocardial infarction, and any unplanned coronary revascularisation at 12 months. QFR could emerge as an adenosine- and wire-free alternative to FFR, making the functional evaluation of intermediary coronary stenosis less invasive and more cost-effective.

QFR-Based Virtual PCI or Conventional Angiography to Guide PCI: The AQVA Trial

BACKGROUND

Post-percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) quantitative flow ratio (QFR) values ≥0.90 are associated with a low incidence of adverse events.

OBJECTIVES

The AQVA (Angio-based Quantitative Flow Ratio Virtual PCI Versus Conventional Angio-guided PCI in the Achievement of an Optimal Post-PCI QFR) trial aims to test whether a QFR-based virtual percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is superior to a conventional angiography-based PCI at obtaining optimal post-PCI QFR results.

METHODS

The AQVA trial is an investigator-initiated, randomized, controlled, parallel-group clinical trial. Three hundred patients (356 study vessels) undergoing PCI were randomized 1:1 to receive either QFR-based virtual PCI or angiography-based PCI (standard of care). The primary outcome was the rate of study vessels with a suboptimal post-PCI QFR value, which was defined as <0.90. Secondary outcomes were procedure duration, stent length/lesion, and stent number/patient.

RESULTS

Overall, 38 (10.7%) study vessels missed the prespecified optimal post-PCI QFR target. The primary outcome occurred significantly more frequently in the angiography-based group (n = 26, 15.1%) compared with the QFR-based virtual PCI group (n = 12 [6.6%]; absolute difference = 8.5%; relative difference = 57%; P = 0.009). The main cause of a suboptimal result in the angiography-based group is the underestimation of a diseased segment outside the stented one. There were no significant differences among secondary endpoints, although stent length/lesion and stent number/patient were numerically lower in the virtual PCI group (P = 0.06 and P = 0.08, respectively), whereas procedure length was higher in the virtual PCI group (P = 0.06).

CONCLUSIONS

The AQVA trial demonstrated the superiority of QFR-based virtual PCI over angiography-based PCI with regard to post-PCI optimal physiological results. Future larger randomized clinical trials that demonstrate the superiority of this approach in terms of clinical outcomes are warranted. (Angio-based Quantitative Flow Ratio Virtual PCI Versus Conventional Angio-guided PCI in the Achievement of an Optimal Post-PCI QFR [AQVA]; NCT04664140).

Intravascular Imaging-Derived Physiology-Basic Principles and Clinical Application

Intravascular imaging-derived physiology is emerging as a promising tool allowing simultaneous anatomic and functional lesion assessment. Recently, several optical coherence tomography-based and intravascular ultrasound-based fractional flow reserve (FFR) indices have been developed that compute FFR through computational fluid dynamics, fluid dynamics equations, or machine-learning methods. This review aims to provide an overview of the currently available intravascular imaging-based physiologic indices, their diagnostic performance, and clinical application.

Outcomes of Functionally Complete vs Incomplete Revascularization: Insights From the FAVOR III China Trial

BACKGROUND

Functional complete revascularization (FCR) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) as determined by the residual functional SYNTAX score (rFSS) based on pressure wire fractional flow reserve assessment has been associated with an improved prognosis.

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to determine the rates and clinical implications of FCR as assessed by the quantitative flow ratio (QFR), and to determine the outcomes of pre-PCI QFR guidance compared with standard angiography guidance in patients achieving and not achieving FCR after PCI.

METHODS

In the randomized, sham-controlled, blinded, multicenter FAVOR (Comparison of Quantitative Flow Ratio Guided and Angiography Guided Percutaneous Intervention in Patients with Coronary Artery Disease) III China trial, QFR-guided PCI reduced the 1-year rate of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) compared with angiography-guided PCI. In the present prespecified substudy, the incidence of MACE was compared according to the presence of post-PCI FCR (rFSS = 0 based on core laboratory-assessed QFR) in the QFR-guided and angiography-guided groups.

RESULTS

Among 3,781 patients with available rFSS assessments, 3,221 (85.2%) achieved FCR, including 88.1% after QFR guidance and 82.2% after angiography guidance (P < 0.001). Patients with FCR had a markedly lower rate of 1-year MACE compared with those with functional incomplete revascularization (FIR) (rFSS ≥1) (5.1% vs 19.7%; P < 0.001). Prognostic models including the rFSS had higher discrimination and reclassification ability than those with the anatomic residual SYNTAX score. The relative risks for 1-year MACE with QFR-guided compared with the angiography-guided lesion selection were consistent in patients achieving FCR (4.1% vs 6.3%; HR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.47-0.88) and in those with FIR (18.7% vs 20.4%; HR: 0.90; 95% CI: 0.61-1.32) (P_interaction = 0.19).

CONCLUSIONS

In this large-scale trial, achieving FCR after PCI was associated with markedly lower 1-year rates of MACE. Compared with standard angiography guidance, QFR-guided PCI lesion selection improved the likelihood of achieving FCR and improved 1-year clinical outcomes in patients with both FCR and FIR.

Prediction of functional results of percutaneous coronary interventions with virtual stenting and quantitative flow ratio

BACKGROUND

The clinical value of residual quantitative flow ratio (rQFR), a novel function of QFR technique, is unknown.

AIM

We investigated the clinical value of rQFR, aimed to predict residual ischemia after virtual percutaneous coronary intervention (vPCI).

METHODS

This is a substudy of the COE-PERSPECTIVE registry, which investigated the prognostic value of post-PCI fractional flow reserve (FFR). From pre-PCI angiograms, QFR and rQFR were analyzed and their diagnostic performance was assessed at blinded fashion using pre-PCI FFR and post-PCI FFR as reference, respectively. The prognostic value of rQFR after vPCI was assessed according to vessel-oriented composite outcome (VOCO) at 2 years.

RESULTS

We analyzed 274 patients (274 vessels) with FFR-based ischemic causing lesions (49%) from 555 screened patients. Pre-PCI QFR and FFR were 0.63 ± 0.10 and 0.66 ± 0.11 (R = 0.756, p < 0.001). rQFR after vPCI and FFR after real PCI were 0.93 ± 0.06 and 0.86 ± 0.07 (R = 0.528, p < 0.001). The mean difference between rQFR and post-PCI FFR was 0.068 (95% limit of agreement: -0.05 to 0.19). Diagnostic performance of rQFR to predict residual ischemia after PCI was good (area under the curve [AUC]: 0.856 [0.804-0.909], p < 0.001). rQFR predicted well the incidence of 2-year VOCO after index PCI (AUC: 0.712 [0.555-0.869], p = 0.041), being similar to that of actual post-PCI FFR (AUC: 0.691 [0.512-0.870], p = 0.061). rQFR ≤0.89 was associated with increased risk of 2-year VOCO (hazard ratio [HR]: 12.9 [2.32-71.3], p = 0.0035). This difference was mainly driven by a higher rate of target vessel revascularization (HR: 16.98 [2.33-123.29], p = 0.0051).

CONCLUSIONS

rQFR estimated from pre-PCI angiography and virtual coronary stenting mildly overestimated functional benefit of PCI. However, it well predicted suboptimal functional result and long-term vessel-related clinical events.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

Influence of fractional flow reserve on the Clinical OutcomEs of PERcutaneouS Coronary Intervention (COE-PESPECTIVE) Registry, NCT01873560.

Diagnostic performance of quantitative flow ratio versus fractional flow reserve and resting full-cycle ratio in intermediate coronary lesions

BACKGROUND

Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) is a novel angiography-derived index aimed to assess the functional relevance of coronary stenoses without pressure wires and adenosine. Good diagnostic yield with the hyperemic fractional flow reserve (FFR) have been reported, while data on the comparison of QFR to non-hyperemic pressure ratios (NHPR) are scarce.

METHODS

In this retrospective, observational and single-center study with a large population representative of the real practice, we assessed and compared the diagnostic performance of contrast flow (cQFR) and fixed flow (fQFR) QFR against the NHPR resting full-cyle ratio (RFR) using FFR as reference standard.

RESULTS

A total of 626 lesions from 544 patients were investigated. Mean diameter stenosis, FFR, cQFR, fQFR and RFR were 44.8%, 0.842, 0.847, 0.857 and 0.912, respectively. The correlation between cQFR and FFR was stronger (r = 0.830, P < 0.001) compared to that between FFR and RFR (r = 0.777, P < 0.001) and between cQFR and RFR (r = 0.687, P < 0.001). Using FFR ≤0.80 as reference, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and overall diagnostic accuracy for cQFR were 82%, 95%, 87%, 92%, and 91%, respectively. cQFR displayed a higher area under the curve (AUC) than fQFR and RFR (0.938 vs. 0.891 vs. 0.869, P < 0.01). The good diagnostic yield of cQFR appeared to be maintained in different clinical subsets including female gender, aortic valve stenosis and atrial fibrillation, and in different anatomical subsets including focal and non-focal lesions.

CONCLUSION

cQFR has a high and better diagnostic performance than the NHPR RFR in predicting FFR-based functional significance of coronary stenoses.

Incorporating clinical parameters to improve the accuracy of angiography-derived computed fractional flow reserve. EUROPEAN HEART JOURNAL. DIGITAL HEALTH 2022;3:481-488. [PMID: 36712154 PMCID: PMC9707918 DOI: 10.1093/ehjdh/ztac045] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0]

Aims

Angiography-derived fractional flow reserve (angio-FFR) permits physiological lesion assessment without the need for an invasive pressure wire or induction of hyperaemia. However, accuracy is limited by assumptions made when defining the distal boundary, namely coronary microvascular resistance (CMVR). We sought to determine whether machine learning (ML) techniques could provide a patient-specific estimate of CMVR and therefore improve the accuracy of angio-FFR.

Methods and results

Patients with chronic coronary syndromes underwent coronary angiography with FFR assessment. Vessel-specific CMVR was computed using a three-dimensional computational fluid dynamics simulation with invasively measured proximal and distal pressures applied as boundary conditions. Predictive models were created using non-linear autoregressive moving average with exogenous input (NARMAX) modelling with computed CMVR as the dependent variable. Angio-FFR (VIRTUheart™) was computed using previously described methods. Three simulations were run: using a generic CMVR value (Model A); using ML-predicted CMVR based upon simple clinical data (Model B); and using ML-predicted CMVR also incorporating echocardiographic data (Model C). The diagnostic (FFR ≤ or >0.80) and absolute accuracies of these models were compared. Eighty-four patients underwent coronary angiography with FFR assessment in 157 vessels. The mean measured FFR was 0.79 (±0.15). The diagnostic and absolute accuracies of each personalized model were: (A) 73% and ±0.10; (B) 81% and ±0.07; and (C) 89% and ±0.05, P < 0.001.

Conclusion

The accuracy of angio-FFR was dependent in part upon CMVR estimation. Personalization of CMVR from standard clinical data resulted in a significant reduction in angio-FFR error.

Quantitative flow ratio to predict long-term coronary artery bypass graft patency in patients with left main coronary artery disease

Purpose

Fractional flow reserve (FFR) has been demonstrated in some studies to predict long-term coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) patency. Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) is an emerging technology which may predict FFR. In this study, we hypothesised that QFR would predict long-term CABG patency and that QFR would offer superior diagnostic performance to quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) and intravascular ultrasound (IVUS).

Methods

A prospective study was performed on patients with left main coronary artery disease who were undergoing CABG. QFR, QCA and IVUS assessment was performed. Follow-up computed tomography coronary angiography and invasive coronary angiography was undertaken to assess graft patency.

Results

A total of 22 patients, comprising of 65 vessels were included in the analysis. At a median follow-up of 3.6 years post CABG (interquartile range, 2.3 to 4.8 years), 12 grafts (18.4%) were occluded. QFR was not statistically significantly higher in occluded grafts (0.81 ± 0.19 vs. 0.69 ± 0.21; P = 0.08). QFR demonstrated a discriminatory power to predict graft occlusion (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.52 to 0.88; P = 0.03). At long-term follow-up, the risk of graft occlusion was higher in vessels with a QFR > 0.80 (58.6% vs. 17.0%; hazard ratio, 3.89; 95% CI, 1.05 to 14.42; P = 0.03 by log-rank test). QCA (minimum lumen diameter, lesion length, diameter stenosis) and IVUS (minimum lumen area, minimum lumen diameter, diameter stenosis) parameters were not predictive of long-term graft patency.

Conclusions

QFR may predict long-term graft patency in patients undergoing CABG.

Diagnostic comparison of automatic and manual TIMI frame-counting-generated quantitative flow ratio (QFR) values

Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) is a computational measurement of FFR (fractional flow reserve), calculated from coronary angiography. Latest QFR software automates TIMI frame counting (TFC), which occurs during the flow step of QFR analyses, making the analysis faster and more reproducible. The objective is to determine the diagnostic performance of QFR values obtained from analyses using automatic TFC compared to those obtained from analyses using manual TFC. This was a single-arm clinical trial that used the prospective analysis of the coronary angiographic image series of 97 patients who underwent evaluation of stable coronary artery disease with FFR/iFR at MedStar Washington Hospital Center in Washington, DC, USA. Automatic and manual TFC QFR values were obtained from the analyses of each of the 97 patients' image series, with manual TFC QFR values as the current gold standard for comparison. The diagnostic performance of automatic TFC QFR values was measured as follows: sensitivity was 0.87 (95% CI 0.66-0.97) and specificity was 1.00 (95% CI 0.9514-1.00), positive predictive value (PPV) was 1.00 (95%CI 1.00-1.00), while the NPV was 0.96 (95% CI 0.96-0.99). Overall accuracy was 96.91% (95% CI 91.23%-99.36%). The agreement as illustrated by the Bland-Altman plot shows a bias of 0.0023 (SD 0.0208) and narrow limits of agreement (LOA): Upper LOA 0.0573 and Lower LOA - 0.0528. The area under curve (AUC) was 0.996. QFR values generated from automatic TFC are comparable to those generated from manual TFC in diagnostic capability. The most recent software update produces values equivalent to those of the previous manual option, and can therefore be used interchangeably.

Diagnostic accuracy of CCTA-derived versus angiography-derived quantitative flow ratio (CAREER) study: a prospective study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Coronary CT angiography (CCTA)-derived quantitative flow ratio (CT-QFR) is a novel non-invasive technology to assess the physiological significance of coronary stenoses, which enables fast and on-site computation of fractional flow reserve (FFR) from CCTA images. The objective of this investigator-initiated, prospective, single-centre clinical trial is to evaluate the diagnostic performance of CT-QFR with respect to angiography-derived QFR, using FFR as the reference standard.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A total of 216 patients who have at least one lesion with a diameter stenosis of 30%-90% in an artery with ≥2.0 mm reference diameter will be enrolled in the study. FFR will be measured during invasive coronary angiography. CT-QFR and QFR will be assessed in two independent core laboratories in a blinded fashion. The primary endpoint is the diagnostic accuracy of CT-QFR in identifying haemodynamically significant coronary stenosis with FFR as the reference standard. The major secondary endpoint is the non-inferiority of CT-QFR compared with QFR in the patients without extensively calcified lesions.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Huadong Hospital Affiliated to Fudan University (2020K192). Outcomes will be disseminated through publications in peer-reviewed journals and presentations at scientific conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04665817.

Functional Evaluation of Intermediate Coronary Lesions with Integrated Computed Tomography Angiography and Invasive Angiography in Patients with Stable Coronary Artery Disease

Background and objectives

The hemodynamic evaluation of coronary stenoses undergoes a transition from wire-based invasive measurements to image-based computational assessments. However, fractional flow reserve (FFR) values derived from coronary CT angiography (CCTA) and angiography-based quantitative flow ratio have certain limitations in accuracy and efficiency, preventing their widespread use in routine practice. Hence, we aimed to investigate the diagnostic performance of FFR derived from the integration of CCTA and invasive angiography (FFR_CT-angio) with artificial intelligence assistance in patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD).

Methods

Forty stable CAD patients with 67 target vessels (50%-90% diameter stenosis) were included in this single-center retrospective study. All patients underwent CCTA followed by coronary angiography with FFR measurement within 30 days. Both CCTA and angiographic images were combined to generate a three-dimensional reconstruction of the coronary arteries using artificial intelligence. Subsequently, functional assessment was performed through a deep learning algorithm. FFR was used as the reference.

Results

FFR_CT-angio values were significantly correlated with FFR values (r = 0.81, P < 0.001, Spearman analysis). Per-vessel diagnostic accuracy of FFR_CT-angio was 92.54%. Sensitivity and specificity in identifying ischemic lesions were 100% and 88.10%, respectively. Positive predictive value and negative predictive value were 83.33% and 100%, respectively. Moreover, the diagnostic performance of FFR_CT-angio was satisfactory in different target vessels and different segment lesions.

Conclusions

FFR_CT-angio exhibits excellent diagnostic performance of identifying ischemic lesions in patients with stable CAD. Combining CCTA and angiographic imaging, FFR_CT-angio may represent an effective and practical alternative to invasive FFR in selected patients.

Angiographic Lesion Morphology Provides Incremental Value to Generalize Quantitative Flow Ratio for Predicting Myocardial Ischemia

Aim

The quantitative flow ratio (QFR) is favorable for functional assessment of coronary artery stenosis without pressure wires and induction of hyperemia. The aim of this study was to explore whether angiographic lesion morphology provides incremental value to generalize QFR for predicting myocardial ischemia in unselected patients.

Methods

This study was a substudy to the CT-FFR CHINA trial, referring 345 participants from five centers with suspected coronary artery disease on coronary CT angiography for diagnostic invasive coronary angiography (ICA). Fractional flow reserve (FFR) was measured in all vessels with 30–90% diameter stenosis. QFR was calculated in 186 lesions from 159 participants in a blinded manner. In addition, parameters to characterize lesion features were recorded or measured, including left anterior descending arteries (LADs)-involved lesions, side branch located at stenotic lesion (BL), multiple lesions (ML), minimal lumen diameter (MLD), reference lumen diameter (RLD), percent diameter stenosis (%DS), lesion length (LL), and LL/MLD4. Logistic regression was used to construct two kinds of models by combining single or two lesion parameters with the QFR. The performances of these models were compared with that of QFR on a per-vessel level.

Results

A total of 148 participants (mean age: 59.5 years; 101 men) with 175 coronary arteries were included for final analysis. In total, 81 (46%) vessels were considered hemodynamically significant. QFR correctly classified 82.29% of the vessels using FFR with a cutoff of 0.80 as reference standard. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of QFR was 0.86 with a sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of 80.25, 84.04, 81.25, and 83.16%, respectively. The combined models (QFR + LAD + MLD, QFR + LAD + %DS, QFR + BL + MLD, and QFR + BL + %DS) outperformed QFR with higher AUCs (0.91 vs. 0.86, P = 0.02; 0.91 vs. 0.86, P = 0.02; 0.91 vs. 0.86, P = 0.02; 0.90 vs. 0.86, P = 0.03, respectively). Compared with QFR, the sensitivity of the combined models (QFR + BL and QFR + MLD) was improved (91.36 vs. 80.25%, 91.36 vs. 80.25%, respectively, both P &lt; 0.05) without compromised specificity or accuracy.

Conclusion

Combined with angiographic lesion parameters, QFR can be optimized for predicting myocardial ischemia in unselected patients.

Role of Quantitative Flow Ratio in Predicting Future Cardiac Allograft Vasculopathy in Heart Transplant Recipients

BACKGROUND

Coronary angiography is the gold standard for cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV) diagnosis, but it usually detects the disease at an advanced stage. We investigated the role of quantitative flow ratio (QFR), a noninvasive tool to identify potentially flow-limiting lesions, in predicting CAV development in heart transplant recipients.

METHODS

Consecutive heart transplant recipients with no evidence of angiographic CAV at baseline coronary angiography were retrospectively included between January 2010 and December 2015, and QFR computation was performed. The relationship between vessel QFR and the occurrence of angiographic vessel-related CAV (≥50% stenosis) was assessed.

RESULTS

One hundred forty-three patients were included and QFR computation was feasible in 241 vessels. The median value of QFR at baseline coronary angiography was 0.98 (interquartile range, 0.94-1.00). During a median follow-up of 6.0 years (interquartile range, 4.6-7.8 years), vessel-related CAV occurred in 25 (10.4%) vessels. Receiver-operating characteristic curve analysis identified a QFR best cutoff of ≤0.95 (area under the curve, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.71-0.90]; P<0.001). QFR≤0.95 was associated with an increased risk of vessel-related CAV (adjusted hazard ratio, 20.87 [95% CI, 5.35-81.43]; P<0.001). In an exploratory analysis, QFR≤0.95 in at least 2 vessels was associated with higher incidence of cardiovascular death or late graft dysfunction (71.4% in recipients with 2-3 vessels affected versus 5.1% in recipients with 0-1 vessels affected, P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In a cohort of heart transplant recipients, QFR computation at baseline coronary angiography may be a safe and reliable tool to predict vessel-related CAV and clinical outcomes at long-term follow-up.

Vessel fractional flow reserve (vFFR) for the assessment of stenosis severity: the FAST II study

BACKGROUND

Fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is superior to angiography-guided PCI. The clinical uptake of FFR has been limited, however, by the need to advance a wire in the coronary artery, the additional time required and the need for hyperaemic agents which can cause patient discomfort. FFR derived from routine coronary angiography eliminates these issues.

AIMS

The aim of this study was to assess the diagnostic performance and accuracy of three-dimensional quantitative coronary angiography (3D-QCA)-based vessel FFR (vFFR) compared to pressure wire-based FFR (≤0.80).

METHODS

The FAST II (Fast Assessment of STenosis severity) study was a prospective observational multicentre study designed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of vFFR compared to the reference standard (pressure wire-based FFR ≤0.80). A total of 334 patients from six centres were enrolled. Both site-determined and blinded independent core lab vFFR measurements were compared to FFR.

RESULTS

The core lab vFFR was 0.83±0.09 and pressure wire-based FFR 0.83±0.08. A good correlation was found between core lab vFFR and pressure wire-based FFR (R=0.74; p<0.001; mean bias 0.0029±0.0642). vFFR had an excellent diagnostic accuracy in identifying lesions with an invasive wire-based FFR ≤0.80 (area under the curve [AUC] 0.93; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.90-0.96; p<0.001). Positive predictive value, negative predictive value, diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of vFFR were 90%, 90%, 90%, 81% and 95%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

3D-QCA-based vFFR has excellent diagnostic performance to detect FFR ≤0.80. The study was registered on clinicaltrials.gov under identifier NCT03791320.

Angiography-Based Fractional Flow Reserve: State of the Art

Purpose of Review

Three-dimensional quantitative coronary angiography-based methods of fractional flow reserve (FFR) derivation have emerged as an appealing alternative to conventional pressure-wire-based physiological lesion assessment and have the potential to further extend the use of physiology in general. Here, we summarize the current evidence related to angiography-based FFR and perspectives on future developments.

Recent Findings

Growing evidence suggests good diagnostic performance of angiography-based FFR measurements, both in chronic and acute coronary syndromes, as well as in specific lesion subsets, such as long and calcified lesions, left main coronary stenosis, and bifurcations. More recently, promising results on the superiority of angiography-based FFR as compared to angiography-guided PCI have been published.

Summary

Currently available angiography -FFR indices proved to be an excellent alternative to invasive pressure wire-based FFR. Dedicated prospective outcome data comparing these indices to routine guideline recommended PCI including the use of FFR are eagerly awaited.

Angiography-derived physiology guidance vs usual care in an All-comers PCI population treated with the healing-targeted supreme stent and Ticagrelor monotherapy: PIONEER IV trial design

BACKGROUND

Current ESC guidelines recommend the use of intra-coronary pressure guidewires for functional assessment of intermediate-grade coronary stenoses. Angiography-derived quantitative flow ratio (QFR) is a novel method of assessing these stenoses, and guiding percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

METHODS/DESIGN

The PIONEER IV trial is a prospective, all-comers, multi-center trial, which will randomize 2,540 patients in a 1:1 ratio to PCI guided by angiography-derived physiology or usual care, with unrestricted use in both arms of the Healing-Targeted Supreme sirolimus-eluting stent (HT Supreme). The stent's fast, biologically healthy, and robust endothelial coverage allows for short dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT); hence the antiplatelet regimen of choice is 1-month DAPT, followed by ticagrelor monotherapy. In the angiography-derived physiology guided arm, lesions will be functionally assessed using on-line QFR, with stenting indicated in lesions with a QFR ≤0.80. Post-stenting, QFR will be repeated in the stented vessel(s), with post-dilatation or additional stenting recommended if the QFR<0.91 distal to the stent, or if the delta QFR (across the stent) is >0.05. Usual care PCI is performed according to standard clinical practice. The primary endpoint is a non-inferiority comparison of the patient-oriented composite endpoint (POCE) of all-cause death, any stroke, any myocardial infarction, or any clinically, and physiologically driven revascularization with a non-inferiority risk-difference margin of 3.2%, at 1-year post-procedure. Clinical follow-up will be up to 3 years.

SUMMARY

The PIONEER IV trial aims to demonstrate non-inferiority of QFR-guided PCI to usual care PCI with respect to POCE at 1-year in patients treated with HT Supreme stents and ticagrelor monotherapy.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov UNIQUE IDENTIFIER: NCT04923191 CLASSIFICATIONS: Interventional Cardiology.

Heart Team risk assessment with angiography-derived fractional flow reserve determining the optimal revascularization strategy in patients with multivessel disease: Trial design and rationale for the DECISION QFR randomized trial

In patients with multivessel disease (MVD), functional information on lesions improves the prognostic capability of the SYNTAX score. Quantitative flow ratio (QFR®) is an angiography‐derived fractional flow reserve (FFR) that does not require a pressure wire or pharmacological hyperemia. We aimed to investigate the feasibility of QFR‐based patient information in Heart Teams' discussions to determine the optimal revascularization strategy for patients with MVD. We hypothesized that there is an acceptable agreement between treatment recommendations based on the QFR approach and recommendation based on the FFR approach. The DECISION QFR study is a prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled trial that will include patients with MVD who require revascularization. Two Heart Teams comprising cardiologists and cardiac surgeons will be randomized to select a revascularization strategy (percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass graft) according to patient information either based on QFR or on FFR. All 260 patients will be assessed by both teams with reference to the anatomical and functional SYNTAX score/SYNTAX score II 2020 derived from the allocated physiological index (QFR or FFR). The primary endpoint of the trial is the level of agreement between the treatment recommendations of both teams, assessed using Cohen's κ. As of March 2022, the patient enrollment has been completed and 230 patients have been discussed in both Heart Teams. The current trial will indicate the usefulness of QFR, which enables a wireless multivessel physiological interrogation, in the discussions of Heart Teams to determine the optimal revascularization strategy for MVD.

Post-PCI quantitative flow ratio predicts 3-year outcome after rotational atherectomy in patients with heavily calcified lesions

Background

The study sought to investigate the clinical predictive value of quantitative flow ratio (QFR) for the long‐term outcome in patients with heavily calcified lesions who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) following rotational atherectomy (RA).

Methods

In this retrospective study, 393 consecutive patients from 2009 to 2017 were enrolled. The QFR of the entire target vessel (QFRv) and the QFR of the stent plus 5 mm proximally and distally (in‐segment) (QFRi) were measured. The primary endpoint was target lesion failure (TLF), including target lesion‐cardiac death (TL‐CD), target lesion‐myocardial infarction (TL‐MI), and clinically driven‐target lesion revascularization (CD‐TLR).

Results

A total of 224 patients with 224 calcified lesions completed the clinical follow‐up, and 52 patients had TLF. There was no significant difference in QFRv post‐PCI between non‐TLF and TLF groups (p > .05). However, QFRi post PCI was significantly higher in the non‐TLF group than in the TLF group. Multivariate Cox regression showed that QFRi post‐PCI was an excellent predictor of TLF after a 3‐year follow‐up (HR 1.7E⁻⁸ [5.3E⁻¹¹–5.6E^‐6]; p < .01). Furthermore, receiver‐operating characteristic curve analysis demonstrated that the optimal cutoff value of QFRi for predicting the long‐term TLF was 0.94 (area under the curve: 0.826, 95% confidence interval: 0.756–0.895; sensitivity: 89.5%, specificity: 69.2%; p < .01). The QFRi ≤ 0.94 post‐PCI was negatively associated with TLF, including TL‐CD, TL‐MI, and CD‐TLR (p < .01).

Conclusions

QFRi post‐PCI showed a high predictive value for TLF for during a 3‐year follow‐up in patients who underwent PCI following RA; specifically, lower QFRi values post‐PCI were associated with worse TLF.

Reproducibility of quantitative flow ratio: the QREP study

BACKGROUND

Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) is a tool for physiological lesion assessment based on invasive coronary angiography.

AIMS

We aimed to assess the reproducibility of QFR computed from the same angiograms as assessed by multiple observers from different, international sites.

METHODS

We included 50 patients previously enrolled in dedicated QFR studies. QFR was computed twice, one month apart by five blinded observers. The main analysis was the coefficient of variation (CV) as a measure of intra- and inter-observer reproducibility. Key secondary analysis was the identification of clinical and procedural characteristics predicting reproducibility.

RESULTS

The intra-observer CV ranged from 2.3% (1.5-2.8) to 10.2% (6.6-12.0) among the observers. The inter-observer CV was 9.4% (8.0-10.5). The QFR observer, low angiographic quality, and low fractional flow reserve (FFR) were independent predictors of a large absolute difference between repeated QFR measurements defined as a difference larger than the median difference (>0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

The inter- and intra-observer reproducibility for QFR computed from the same angiograms ranged from high to poor among multiple observers from different sites with an average agreement of 0.01±0.08 for repeated measurements. The reproducibility was dependent on the observer, angiographic quality and the coronary artery stenosis severity as assessed by FFR.

Functional Assessment of Cerebral Artery Stenosis by Angiography-Based Quantitative Flow Ratio: A Pilot Study

Background

Increasing attention has been paid to the hemodynamic evaluation of cerebral arterial stenosis. We aimed to demonstrate the performance of angiography-based quantitative flow ratio (QFR) to assess hemodynamic alterations caused by luminal stenoses, using invasive fractional pressure ratios (FPRs) as a reference standard.

Methods

Between March 2013 and December 2019, 29 patients undergoing the pressure gradient measurement of cerebral atherosclerosis were retrospectively enrolled. Wire-based FPR was defined by the arterial pressure distal to the stenotic lesion (Pd) to proximal (Pa) pressure ratios (Pd/Pa). FPR < 0.70 or FPR < 0.75 was assumed as hemodynamically significant stenosis. The new method of computing QFR from a single angiographic view, i.e., the Murray law-based QFR, was applied to the interrogated vessel. An artificial intelligence algorithm was developed to realize the automatic delineation of vascular contour.

Results

Fractional pressure ratio and QFR were assessed in 38 vessels from 29 patients. Excellent correlation and agreement were observed between QFR and FPR [r = 0.879, P < 0.001; mean difference (bias): −0.006, 95% limits of agreement: −0.198 to 0.209, respectively). Intra-observer and inter-observer reliability in QFR were excellent (intra-class correlation coefficients, 0.996 and 0.973, respectively). For predicting FPR < 0.70, the area under the receiver-operating characteristic curves (AUC) of QFR was 0.946 (95% CI, 0.820 to 0.993%). The sensitivity and specificity of QFR < 0.70 for identifying FPR < 0.70 was 88.9% (95% CI, 65.3 to 98.6%) and 85.0% (95% CI, 62.1 to 96.8%). For predicting FPR < 0.75, QFR showed similar performance with an AUC equal to 0.926.

Conclusion

Computational QFR from a single angiographic view achieved comparable results to the wire-based FPR. The excellent diagnostic performance and repeatability empower QFR with high feasibility in the functional assessment of cerebral arterial stenosis.

Characterization of quantitative flow ratio and fractional flow reserve discordance using doppler flow and clinical follow-up

The physiological mechanisms of quantitative flow ratio and fractional flow reserve disagreement are not fully understood. We aimed to characterize the coronary flow and resistance profile of intermediate stenosed epicardial coronary arteries with concordant and discordant FFR and QFR. Post-hoc analysis of the DEFINE-FLOW study. Anatomical and Doppler-derived physiological parameters were compared for lesions with FFR+QFR- (n = 18) vs. FFR+QFR+ (n = 43) and for FFR-QFR+ (n = 34) vs. FFR-QFR- (n = 139). The association of QFR results with the two-year rate of target vessel failure was assessed in the proportion of vessels (n = 195) that did not undergo revascularization. Coronary flow reserve was higher [2.3 (IQR: 2.1-2.7) vs. 1.9 (IQR: 1.5-2.4)], hyperemic microvascular resistance lower [1.72 (IQR: 1.48-2.31) vs. 2.26 (IQR: 1.79-2.87)] and anatomical lesion severity less severe [% diameter stenosis 45.5 (IQR: 41.5-52.5) vs. 58.5 (IQR: 53.1-64.0)] for FFR+QFR- lesions compared with FFR+QFR+ lesions. In comparison of FFR-QFR+ vs. FFR-QFR- lesions, lesion severity was more severe [% diameter stenosis 55.2 (IQR: 51.7-61.3) vs. 43.4 (IQR: 35.0-50.6)] while coronary flow reserve [2.2 (IQR: 1.9-2.9) vs. 2.2 (IQR: 1.9-2.6)] and hyperemic microvascular resistance [2.34 (IQR: 1.85-2.81) vs. 2.57 (IQR: 2.01-3.22)] did not differ. The agreement and diagnostic performance of FFR using hyperemic stenosis resistance (> 0.80) as reference standard was higher compared with QFR and coronary flow reserve. Disagreement between FFR and QFR is partly explained by physiological and anatomical factors. Clinical Trials Registration https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT01813435. Changes in central physiological and anatomical parameters according to FFR and QFR match/mismatch quadrants.

The Role of Coronary Physiology in Contemporary Percutaneous Coronary Interventions

Invasive assessment of coronary physiology has radically changed the paradigm of myocardial revascularization in patients with coronary artery disease. Despite the prognostic improvement associated with ischemia-driven revascularization strategy, functional assessment of angiographic intermediate epicardial stenosis remains largely underused in clinical practice. Multiple tools have been developed or are under development in order to reduce the invasiveness, cost, and extra procedural time associated with the invasive assessment of coronary physiology. Besides epicardial stenosis, a growing body of evidence highlights the role of coronary microcirculation in regulating coronary flow with consequent pathophysiological and clinical and prognostic implications. Adequate assessment of coronary microcirculation function and integrity has then become another component of the decision-making algorithm for optimal diagnosis and treatment of coronary syndromes. This review aims at providing a comprehensive description of tools and techniques currently available in the catheterization laboratory to obtain a thorough and complete functional assessment of the entire coronary tree (both for the epicardial and microvascular compartments).

Non-invasive imaging software to assess the functional significance of coronary stenoses: a systematic review and economic evaluation

BACKGROUND

QAngio^® XA 3D/QFR^® (three-dimensional/quantitative flow ratio) imaging software (Medis Medical Imaging Systems BV, Leiden, the Netherlands) and CAAS^® vFFR^® (vessel fractional flow reserve) imaging software (Pie Medical Imaging BV, Maastricht, the Netherlands) are non-invasive technologies to assess the functional significance of coronary stenoses, which can be alternatives to invasive fractional flow reserve assessment.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives were to determine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of QAngio XA 3D/QFR and CAAS vFFR.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of all evidence on QAngio XA 3D/QFR and CAAS vFFR, including diagnostic accuracy, clinical effectiveness, implementation and economic analyses. We searched MEDLINE and other databases to January 2020 for studies where either technology was used and compared with fractional flow reserve in patients with intermediate stenosis. The risk of bias was assessed with quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. Meta-analyses of diagnostic accuracy were performed. Clinical and implementation outcomes were synthesised narratively. A simulation study investigated the clinical impact of using QAngio XA 3D/QFR. We developed a de novo decision-analytic model to estimate the cost-effectiveness of QAngio XA 3D/QFR and CAAS vFFR relative to invasive fractional flow reserve or invasive coronary angiography alone. Scenario analyses were undertaken to explore the robustness of the results to variation in the sources of data used to populate the model and alternative assumptions.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine studies (5440 patients) of QAngio XA 3D/QFR and three studies (500 patients) of CAAS vFFR were included. QAngio XA 3D/QFR had good diagnostic accuracy to predict functionally significant fractional flow reserve (≤ 0.80 cut-off point); contrast-flow quantitative flow ratio had a sensitivity of 85% (95% confidence interval 78% to 90%) and a specificity of 91% (95% confidence interval 85% to 95%). A total of 95% of quantitative flow ratio measurements were within 0.14 of the fractional flow reserve. Data on the diagnostic accuracy of CAAS vFFR were limited and a full meta-analysis was not feasible. There were very few data on clinical and implementation outcomes. The simulation found that quantitative flow ratio slightly increased the revascularisation rate when compared with fractional flow reserve, from 40.2% to 42.0%. Quantitative flow ratio and fractional flow reserve resulted in similar numbers of subsequent coronary events. The base-case cost-effectiveness results showed that the test strategy with the highest net benefit was invasive coronary angiography with confirmatory fractional flow reserve. The next best strategies were QAngio XA 3D/QFR and CAAS vFFR (without fractional flow reserve). However, the difference in net benefit between this best strategy and the next best was small, ranging from 0.007 to 0.012 quality-adjusted life-years (or equivalently £140-240) per patient diagnosed at a cost-effectiveness threshold of £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year.

LIMITATIONS

Diagnostic accuracy evidence on CAAS vFFR, and evidence on the clinical impact of QAngio XA 3D/QFR, were limited.

CONCLUSIONS

Quantitative flow ratio as measured by QAngio XA 3D/QFR has good agreement and diagnostic accuracy compared with fractional flow reserve and is preferable to standard invasive coronary angiography alone. It appears to have very similar cost-effectiveness to fractional flow reserve and, therefore, pending further evidence on general clinical benefits and specific subgroups, could be a reasonable alternative. The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of CAAS vFFR are uncertain. Randomised controlled trial evidence evaluating the effect of quantitative flow ratio on clinical and patient-centred outcomes is needed.

FUTURE WORK

Studies are required to assess the diagnostic accuracy and clinical feasibility of CAAS vFFR. Large ongoing randomised trials will hopefully inform the clinical value of QAngio XA 3D/QFR.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42019154575.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Evidence Synthesis programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 56. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Residual Quantitative Flow Ratio to Estimate Post-Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Fractional Flow Reserve

Objectives

Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) computes fractional flow reserve (FFR) based on invasive coronary angiography (ICA). Residual QFR estimates post‐percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) FFR. This study sought to assess the relationship of residual QFR with post-PCI FFR.

Methods

Residual QFR analysis, using pre-PCI ICA, was attempted in 159 vessels with post-PCI FFR. QFR lesion location was matched with the PCI location to simulate the performed intervention and allow computation of residual QFR. A post-PCI FFR < 0.90 was used to define a suboptimal PCI result.

Results

Residual QFR computation was successful in 128 (81%) vessels. Median residual QFR was higher than post-PCI FFR (0.96 Q1–Q3: 0.91–0.99 vs. 0.91 Q1–Q3: 0.86–0.96, p < 0.001). A significant correlation and agreement were observed between residual QFR and post-PCI FFR (R = 0.56 and intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.47, p < 0.001 for both). Following PCI, an FFR < 0.90 was observed in 54 (42%) vessels. Specificity, positive predictive value, sensitivity, and negative predictive value of residual QFR for assessment of the PCI result were 96% (95% confidence interval (CI): 87–99%), 89% (95% CI: 72–96%), 44% (95% CI: 31–59%), and 70% (95% CI: 65–75%), respectively. Residual QFR had an accuracy of 74% (95% CI: 66–82%) and an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.79 (95% CI: 0.71–0.86).

Conclusions

A significant correlation and agreement between residual QFR and post-PCI FFR were observed. Residual QFR ≥ 0.90 did not necessarily commensurate with a satisfactory PCI (post-PCI FFR ≥ 0.90). In contrast, residual QFR exhibited a high specificity for prediction of a suboptimal PCI result.

Coronary physiologic assessment based on angiography and intracoronary imaging

Despite the current evidence supporting clinical benefits of fractional flow reserve (FFR), its uptake in the cardiac catheterization laboratory has been slow due to procedural cost and increased time with the need for maximum hyperemia. Recently, novel physiological indices derived from coronary angiography and intracoronary imaging have emerged to overcome issues with a wire-based FFR. Angiography-based FFR can be measured without vessel instrumentation and has shown excellent diagnostic performance using wire-based FFR as the reference standard. Thus, angiography-based FFR may facilitate coronary functional assessment before and after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Angiography-based index of microcirculatory resistance (IMR) is another new computational index for assessing the coronary microcirculation. Although angiography-derived IMR remains in an early phase of development and requires further validation, its less-invasive nature may help broaden the adoption of microvascular functional assessment in various conditions such as myocardial infarction and cardiac allograft vasculopathy. Lastly, computational FFR based on intravascular ultrasound and optical coherence tomography allows detailed lesion assessment from both morphological and functional standpoints. Given a growing interest in physiology-guided PCI optimization strategies, intravascular imaging-based FFR may become the main assessment tool to confirm successful PCI.

Comparison of quantitative flow ratio and invasive physiology indices in a diverse population at a tertiary United States hospital

BACKGROUND

Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) is a technology to evaluate the coronary stenosis significance on 3-dimensional quantitative coronary angiography. The aim of this study is to evaluate and compare the QFR versus fractional flow reserve (FFR) and/or instantaneous free-wave ratio (iFR) in a US population with a fair African American population representation.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This was a retrospective, observational and single center study which enrolled 100 patients who underwent coronary angiography. The diagnostic performance of QFR in terms of sensitivity was 0.80 (95%CI 0.64-0.97) and specificity was 0.95 (95%CI 0.90-1.00), the positive predictive value (PPV) was 0.83 (0.68-0.98), while the NPV was 0.94 (0.88-0.99). The overall accuracy was 0.91 and area under curve (AUC) was 0.92 (95% CI 0.87-0.97). The R-squared was 0.54 and the Bland-Altman plot showed a bias of 0.0016 (SD 0.063) and limits of agreement (LOA): Upper LOA 0.13 and Lower LOA -0.12. In African Americans (n = 33), accuracy, AUC, sensitivity, specificity (94%; 0.90 (0.80-1.00); 0.90 (0.71-1.00); 0.96 (0.87-1.00), respectively) were better than those for the overall population.

CONCLUSIONS

In a US based representative population, vessel QFR accuracy and agreement with FFR as reference is high. Diagnostic performance of QFR in African Americans is also excellent.

Impact of Arterial Remodeling of Intermediate Coronary Lesions on Long-Term Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Stable Coronary Artery Disease: An Intravascular Ultrasound Study

Background

Treatment of coronary intermediate lesions remains a controversy, and the role of arterial remodeling patterns determined by intravascular ultrasound in intermediate lesion is still not well known. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of arterial remodeling of intermediate coronary lesions on long-term clinical outcomes.

Methods

Arterial remodeling patterns were assessed in 212 deferred intermediate lesions from 162 patients after IVUS examination. Negative, intermediate, and positive remodeling was defined as a remodeling index of <0.88, 0.88∼1.0, and >1.0, respectively. The primary endpoint was the composite vessel-oriented clinical events, defined as the composition of target vessel-related cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization. Quantitative flow ratio was assessed for evaluating the functional significance of intermediate lesions.

Results

72 intermediate remodeling lesions were present in 66 patients, whereas 77 negative remodeling lesions were present in 71 patients, and 63 positive remodeling lesions were present in 55 patients. Negative remodeling lesions had the smallest minimum lumen area (4.16 ± 1.03 mm² vs. 5.05 ± 1.39 mm² vs. 4.85 ± 1.76 mm²; P < 0.01), smallest plaque burden (63.45 ± 6.13% vs. 66.12 ± 6.82% vs. 71.17 ± 6.45%; P < 0.01), and highest area stenosis rate (59.32% ± 10.15% vs. 54.61% ± 9.09% vs. 51.67% ± 12.96%; P < 0.01). No significant difference was found in terms of quantitative flow ratio among three groups. At 5 years follow-up, negative remodeling lesions had a higher rate of composite vessel-oriented clinical event (14.3%), compared to intermediate (1.4%, P=0.004) or positive remodeling lesions (4.8%, P=0.06). After adjusting for multiple covariates, negative remodeling remained an independent determinant for vessel-oriented clinical event (HR: 4.849, 95% CI 1.542-15.251, P=0.007).

Conclusion

IVUS-derived negative remodeling is associated with adverse long-term clinical outcome in stable patients with intermediate coronary artery stenosis.

Physiologic Assessment of Coronary Stenosis: Current Status and Future Directions

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is a commonly used treatment option in coronary artery disease (CAD). Reduced major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in those randomized to PCI compared to optimal medical therapy have been demonstrated only if it is performed for physiologically significant coronary lesions. Despite data demonstrating improved outcomes primarily in stable CAD and then acute settings, physiology-guided PCI remains underutilized. This review summarizes the evidence and commonly used methods for physiologic assessment of coronary stenosis.

RECENT FINDINGS

Fractional flow reserve (FFR) is the gold standard for the analysis of lesion severity. Its use is limited by the need for adenosine, which adds time, complexity, and potential adverse effects. Non-hyperemic instantaneous wave-free ratio-guided revascularization and quantitative flow reserve ratio assessment both have shown safety and effectiveness with improved patient outcomes. Coronary physiological assessment solves the ambiguity of coronary angiography. Detecting physiologically significant stenoses is crucial to decide which lesion needs to be treated. Technological advances have led to the development of new assessment indices in addition to FFR.