Objectives We aimed to provide robust performance estimates for quantitative flow ratio (QFR) in assessment of intermediary coronary lesions. Background Angiography-based functional lesion assessment by QFR may appear as a cost saving and safe approach to expand the use of physiology-guided percutaneous coronary interventions. QFR was proven feasible and showed good diagnostic performance in mid-sized off-line and on-line studies with fractional flow reserve (FFR) as reference standard. Methods We performed a collaborative individual patient-data meta-analysis of all available prospective studies with paired assessment of QFR and FFR using the CE-marked QFR application. The main outcome was agreement of QFR and FFR using a two-step analysis strategy with a multilevel mixed model accounting for study and center level variation. Results Of 16 studies identified, four studies had prospective enrollment and provided patient level data reaching a total of 819 patients and 969 vessels with paired FFR and QFR: FAVOR Pilot (n = 73); WIFI II (n = 170); FAVOR II China (n = 304) and FAVOR II Europe-Japan (n = 272). We found an overall agreement (mean difference 0.009 ± 0.068, I2 = 39.6) of QFR with FFR. The diagnostic performance was sensitivity 84% (95%CI: 77-90, I2 = 70.1), specificity 88% (95%CI: 84-91, I2 = 60.1); positive predictive value 80% (95%CI: 76-85, I2 = 33.4), and negative predictive value 95% (95%CI: 93-96, I2 = 75.9). Conclusions Diagnostic performance of QFR was good with FFR as reference in this meta-analysis of high quality studies. QFR could provide an easy, safe, and cost-effective solution for functional evaluation of coronary artery stenosis.

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

Fractional flow reserve (FFR) and instantaneous wave-free ratio are the present standard diagnostic methods for invasive assessment of the functional significance of epicardial coronary stenosis. Despite the overall trend towards more physiology-guided revascularization, there remains a gap between guideline recommendations and the clinical adoption of functional evaluation of stenosis severity. A number of image-based approaches have been proposed to compute FFR without the use of pressure wire and induced hyperaemia. In order to better understand these emerging technologies, we sought to highlight the principles, diagnostic performance, clinical applications, practical aspects, and current challenges of computational physiology in the catheterization laboratory. Computational FFR has the potential to expand and facilitate the use of physiology for diagnosis, procedural guidance, and evaluation of therapies, with anticipated impact on resource utilization and patient outcomes.

Fractional flow reserve in clinical practice: from wire-based invasive measurement to image-based computation

Immediate assessment of coronary microcirculation during treatment of ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) may facilitate patient stratification for targeted treatment algorithms. Use of pressure-wire to measure the index of microcirculatory resistance (IMR) is possible but has inevitable practical restrictions. We aimed to develop and validate angiography-derived index of microcirculatory resistance (IMRangio) as a novel and pressure-wire-free index to facilitate assessment of the coronary microcirculation. 45 STEMI patients treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI) were enrolled. Immediately before stenting and at completion of pPCI, IMR was measured within the infarct related artery (IRA). At the same time points, 2 angiographic views were acquired during hyperaemia to measure quantitative flow ratio (QFR) from which IMRangio was derived. In a subset of 15 patients both IMR and IMRangio were also measured in the non-IRA. Patients underwent cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) at 48 h for assessment of microvascular obstruction (MVO). IMRangio and IMR were significantly correlated (ρ: 0.85, p   1.55% of left ventricular mass) (p = 0.03 and p = 0.005, respectively). Post-pPCI IMRangio presented and area under the curve (AUC) of 0.96 (CI95% 0.92–1.00, p   40U and of 0.81 (CI95% 0.65–0.97, p   1.55%. IMRangio is a promising tool for the assessment of coronary microcirculation. Assessment of IMR without the use of a pressure-wire may enable more rapid, convenient and cost-effective assessment of coronary microvascular function.

/pdf/angiography-derived-index-of-microcirculatory-resistance-as-4fpq424e4y.pdf

Angiography-derived index of microcirculatory resistance as a novel, pressure-wire-free tool to assess coronary microcirculation in ST elevation myocardial infarction.

Objectives: We evaluated the diagnostic performance of quantitative flow ratio (QFR) assessment of nonculprit lesions (NCLs) based on acute setting angiograms obtained in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) with QFR, fractional flow reserve (FFR), and instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) in the staged setting as reference. Background: QFR is an angiography-based approach for the functional evaluation of coronary artery lesions. Methods: This was a post-hoc analysis of the iSTEMI study. NCLs were assessed with iFR in the acute setting and with iFR and FFR at staged (median 13 days) follow-up. Acute and staged QFR values were computed in a core laboratory based on the coronary angiography recordings. Diagnostic cut-off values were ≤0.80 for QFR and FFR, and ≤0.89 for iFR. Results: Staged iFR and FFR data were available for 146 NCLs in 112 patients in the iSTEMI study. Among these, QFR analysis was feasible in 103 (71%) lesions assessed in the acute setting with a mean QFR value of 0.82 (IQR: 0.73–0.91). Staged QFR, FFR, and iFR were 0.80 (IQR: 0.70–0.90), 0.81 (IQR: 0.71–0.88), and 0.91 (IQR: 0.87–0.96), respectively. Classification agreement of acute and staged QFR was 93% (95%Cl: 87–99). The classification agreement of acute QFR was 84% (95%CI: 76–90) using staged FFR as reference and 74% (95%CI: 65–83) using staged iFR as reference. Conclusions: Acute QFR showed a very good diagnostic performance with staged QFR as reference, a good diagnostic performance with staged FFR as reference, and a moderate diagnostic performance with staged iFR as reference.

Quantitative flow ratio for immediate assessment of nonculprit lesions in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction—An iSTEMI substudy

Background Quantitative flow ratio ( QFR ) has a high diagnostic accuracy in assessing functional stenoses relevance, as judged by fractional flow reserve ( FFR ). However, its diagnostic performance has not been thoroughly evaluated using instantaneous wave-free ratio ( iFR ) or coronary flow reserve as the reference standard. This study sought to evaluate the diagnostic performance of QFR using other reference standards beyond FFR . Methods and Results We analyzed 182 patients (253 vessels) with stable ischemic heart disease and 82 patients (105 nonculprit vessels) with acute myocardial infarction in whom coronary stenoses were assessed with FFR , iFR, and coronary flow reserve. Contrast QFR analysis of interrogated vessels was performed in blinded fashion by a core laboratory, and its diagnostic performance was evaluated with respect to the other invasive physiological indices. Mean percentage diameter stenosis, FFR , iFR , coronary flow reserve, and QFR were 53.1±19.0%, 0.80±0.13, 0.88±0.12, 3.14±1.30, and 0.81±0.14, respectively. QFR showed higher correlation ( r=0.863 with FFR versus 0.740 with iFR , P 0.05, overall comparison P=0.061). Conclusions QFR has a high correlation and agreement with respect to both FFR and iFR , although it is better when FFR is used as the comparator. As a pressure-derived index not depending on wire or adenosine, QFR might be a promising tool for improving the adoption rate of physiology-based revascularization in clinical practice.

Diagnostic Agreement of Quantitative Flow Ratio With Fractional Flow Reserve and Instantaneous Wave‐Free Ratio

Objectives The authors sought to evaluate the influence of coronary microcirculatory dysfunction (CMD) on the diagnostic performance of the quantitative flow ratio (QFR). Background Functional angiographic assessment of coronary stenoses based on fluid dynamics, such as QFR, constitutes an attractive alternative to fractional flow reserve (FFR). However, it is unknown whether CMD affects the reliability of angiography-based functional indices. Methods FFR and the index of microcirculatory resistance (IMR) were measured in 300 vessels (248 patients) as part of a multicenter international registry. QFR was calculated at a blinded core laboratory. Vessels were classified into 2 groups according to microcirculatory status: low IMR ( Results Percent diameter stenosis (%DS) and FFR were similar in low- and high-IMR groups (%DS 51 ± 12% vs. 53 ± 11%; p = 0.16; FFR 0.80 ± 0.11 vs. 0.81 ± 0.11; p = 0.23, respectively). In the overall cohort, classification agreement (CA) between QFR and FFR and diagnostic efficiency of QFR (area under the receiver-operating characteristics curve [AUC]) were high (CA: 88%; AUC: 0.93 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.90 to 0.96]). However, when assessed according to microcirculatory status, a significantly lower CA and AUC of QFR were found in the high-IMR group as compared with the low-IMR group (CA: 76% vs. 92%; p  Conclusions CMD decreases the diagnostic performance of QFR. However, even in the presence of CMD, QFR remains superior to angiography alone in ascertaining functional stenosis severity.

Catherine Liontou

Papers

Influence of Microcirculatory Dysfunction on Angiography-Based Functional Assessment of Coronary Stenoses

Functional assessment of in-stent restenosis with quantitative flow ratio.