Literature DB >> 30234896

Reproducibility of quantitative flow ratio: An inter-core laboratory variability study.

Yunxiao Chang1, Liwei Chen2, Jelmer Westra3, Zhongwei Sun4, Changdong Guan4, Yimin Zhang1, Daixin Ding1, Bo Xu4, Shengxian Tu5.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) is a novel approach to derive fractional flow reserve (FFR) from coronary angiography. This study sought to evaluate the reproducibility of QFR when analyzed in independent core laboratories.
METHODS: All interrogated vessels in the FAVOR II China Study were separately analyzed using the AngioPlus system (Pulse medical imaging technology, Shanghai) by two independent core laboratories, following the same standard operation procedures. The analysts were blinded to the FFR values and online QFR values. For each interrogated vessel, two identical angiographic image runs were used by two core laboratories for QFR computation. In both core laboratories QFR was successfully obtained in 330 of 332 vessels, in which FFR was available in 328 vessels. Thus, 328 vessels ended in the present statistical analysis.
RESULTS: The mean difference in contrast-flow QFR between the two core laboratories was 0.004 ± 0.03 (p = 0.040), which was slightly smaller than that between the online analysis and the two core laboratories (0.01 ± 0.05, p < 0.001 and 0.01 ± 0.05, p = 0.038). The mean difference of QFR with re-spect to FFR were comparable between the two core laboratories (0.002 ± 0.06, p = 0.609, and 0.002 ± 0.06, p = 0.531). Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis showed that diagnostic accuracies of QFR analyzed by the two core laboratories were both excellent (area under the curve: 0.970 vs. 0.963, p = 0.142), when using FFR as the reference standard.
CONCLUSIONS: The present study showed good inter-core laboratory reproducibility of QFR in assessing functionally-significant stenosis. It suggests that QFR analyses can be carried out in different core labo-ratories if, and only if, highly standardized conditions are maintained.

Keywords:  core laboratories; coronary stenosis; fractional flow reserve; quantitative flow ratio; reproducibility

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30234896      PMCID: PMC8015972          DOI: 10.5603/CJ.a2018.0105

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cardiol J        ISSN: 1898-018X            Impact factor:   2.737


  24 in total

1.  Fractional flow reserve versus angiography for guiding percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease: 2-year follow-up of the FAME (Fractional Flow Reserve Versus Angiography for Multivessel Evaluation) study.

Authors:  Nico H J Pijls; William F Fearon; Pim A L Tonino; Uwe Siebert; Fumiaki Ikeno; Bernhard Bornschein; Marcel van't Veer; Volker Klauss; Ganesh Manoharan; Thomas Engstrøm; Keith G Oldroyd; Peter N Ver Lee; Philip A MacCarthy; Bernard De Bruyne
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2010-05-28       Impact factor: 24.094

2.  Percutaneous coronary intervention of functionally nonsignificant stenosis: 5-year follow-up of the DEFER Study.

Authors:  Nico H J Pijls; Pepijn van Schaardenburgh; Ganesh Manoharan; Eric Boersma; Jan-Willem Bech; Marcel van't Veer; Frits Bär; Jan Hoorntje; Jacques Koolen; William Wijns; Bernard de Bruyne
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2007-05-17       Impact factor: 24.094

3.  Prognostic value of fractional flow reserve: linking physiologic severity to clinical outcomes.

Authors:  Nils P Johnson; Gábor G Tóth; Dejian Lai; Hongjian Zhu; Göksel Açar; Pierfrancesco Agostoni; Yolande Appelman; Fatih Arslan; Emanuele Barbato; Shao-Liang Chen; Luigi Di Serafino; Antonio J Domínguez-Franco; Patrick Dupouy; Ali M Esen; Ozlem B Esen; Michalis Hamilos; Kohichiro Iwasaki; Lisette O Jensen; Manuel F Jiménez-Navarro; Demosthenes G Katritsis; Sinan A Kocaman; Bon-Kwon Koo; Ramón López-Palop; Jeffrey D Lorin; Louis H Miller; Olivier Muller; Chang-Wook Nam; Niels Oud; Etienne Puymirat; Johannes Rieber; Gilles Rioufol; Josep Rodés-Cabau; Steven P Sedlis; Yasuchika Takeishi; Pim A L Tonino; Eric Van Belle; Edoardo Verna; Gerald S Werner; William F Fearon; Nico H J Pijls; Bernard De Bruyne; K Lance Gould
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2014-10-21       Impact factor: 24.094

4.  2014 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization: the Task Force on Myocardial Revascularization of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS). Developed with the special contribution of the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI).

Authors:  Philippe Kolh; Stephan Windecker; Fernando Alfonso; Jean-Philippe Collet; Jochen Cremer; Volkmar Falk; Gerasimos Filippatos; Christian Hamm; Stuart J Head; Peter Jüni; A Pieter Kappetein; Adnan Kastrati; Juhani Knuuti; Ulf Landmesser; Günther Laufer; Franz-Josef Neumann; Dimitrios J Richter; Patrick Schauerte; Miguel Sousa Uva; Giulio G Stefanini; David Paul Taggart; Lucia Torracca; Marco Valgimigli; William Wijns; Adam Witkowski; Jose Luis Zamorano; Stephan Achenbach; Helmut Baumgartner; Jeroen J Bax; Héctor Bueno; Veronica Dean; Christi Deaton; Çetin Erol; Robert Fagard; Roberto Ferrari; David Hasdai; Arno W Hoes; Paulus Kirchhof; Juhani Knuuti; Philippe Kolh; Patrizio Lancellotti; Ales Linhart; Petros Nihoyannopoulos; Massimo F Piepoli; Piotr Ponikowski; Per Anton Sirnes; Juan Luis Tamargo; Michal Tendera; Adam Torbicki; William Wijns; Stephan Windecker; Miguel Sousa Uva; Stephan Achenbach; John Pepper; Anelechi Anyanwu; Lina Badimon; Johann Bauersachs; Andreas Baumbach; Farzin Beygui; Nikolaos Bonaros; Marco De Carlo; Christi Deaton; Dobromir Dobrev; Joel Dunning; Eric Eeckhout; Stephan Gielen; David Hasdai; Paulus Kirchhof; Heyman Luckraz; Heiko Mahrholdt; Gilles Montalescot; Domenico Paparella; Ardawan J Rastan; Marcelo Sanmartin; Paul Sergeant; Sigmund Silber; Juan Tamargo; Jurrien ten Berg; Holger Thiele; Robert-Jan van Geuns; Hans-Otto Wagner; Sven Wassmann; Olaf Wendler; Jose Luis Zamorano
Journal:  Eur J Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2014-08-29       Impact factor: 4.191

5.  Diagnostic Accuracy of Quantitative Flow Ratio for Assessing Myocardial Ischemia in Prior Myocardial Infarction.

Authors:  Hiroki Emori; Takashi Kubo; Takeyoshi Kameyama; Yasushi Ino; Yoshiki Matsuo; Hironori Kitabata; Kosei Terada; Yosuke Katayama; Hiroshi Aoki; Akira Taruya; Kunihiro Shimamura; Shingo Ota; Atsushi Tanaka; Takeshi Hozumi; Takashi Akasaka
Journal:  Circ J       Date:  2018-01-16       Impact factor: 2.993

6.  Functional SYNTAX score for risk assessment in multivessel coronary artery disease.

Authors:  Chang-Wook Nam; Fabio Mangiacapra; Robert Entjes; In-Sung Chung; Jan-Willem Sels; Pim A L Tonino; Bernard De Bruyne; Nico H J Pijls; William F Fearon
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2011-09-13       Impact factor: 24.094

7.  Fractional flow reserve versus angiography for guiding percutaneous coronary intervention.

Authors:  Pim A L Tonino; Bernard De Bruyne; Nico H J Pijls; Uwe Siebert; Fumiaki Ikeno; Marcel van' t Veer; Volker Klauss; Ganesh Manoharan; Thomas Engstrøm; Keith G Oldroyd; Peter N Ver Lee; Philip A MacCarthy; William F Fearon
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2009-01-15       Impact factor: 91.245

8.  Diagnostic Accuracy of Angiography-Based Quantitative Flow Ratio Measurements for Online Assessment of Coronary Stenosis.

Authors:  Bo Xu; Shengxian Tu; Shubin Qiao; Xinkai Qu; Yundai Chen; Junqing Yang; Lijun Guo; Zhongwei Sun; Zehang Li; Feng Tian; Weiyi Fang; Jiyan Chen; Wei Li; Changdong Guan; Niels R Holm; William Wijns; Shengshou Hu
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2017-10-31       Impact factor: 24.094

9.  Diagnostic Accuracy of Fast Computational Approaches to Derive Fractional Flow Reserve From Diagnostic Coronary Angiography: The International Multicenter FAVOR Pilot Study.

Authors:  Shengxian Tu; Jelmer Westra; Junqing Yang; Clemens von Birgelen; Angela Ferrara; Mariano Pellicano; Holger Nef; Matteo Tebaldi; Yoshinobu Murasato; Alexandra Lansky; Emanuele Barbato; Liefke C van der Heijden; Johan H C Reiber; Niels R Holm; William Wijns
Journal:  JACC Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2016-10-10       Impact factor: 11.195

10.  Accuracy and reproducibility of fast fractional flow reserve computation from invasive coronary angiography.

Authors:  A R van Rosendael; G Koning; A C Dimitriu-Leen; J M Smit; J M Montero-Cabezas; F van der Kley; J W Jukema; J H C Reiber; J J Bax; A J H A Scholte
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2017-06-22       Impact factor: 2.357

View more
  5 in total

1.  Is quantitative flow ratio enough to accurately assess intermediate coronary stenosis? A comparison study with fractional flow reserve.

Authors:  Paweł Kleczyński; Artur Dziewierz; Lukasz Rzeszutko; Dariusz Dudek; Jacek Legutko
Journal:  Cardiol J       Date:  2019       Impact factor: 2.737

2.  Diagnostic performance of quantitative flow ratio, non-hyperaemic pressure indices and fractional flow reserve for the assessment of coronary lesions in severe aortic stenosis.

Authors:  Cameron Dowling; Michael Michail; Jun Michael Zhang; Andrea Comella; Udit Thakur; Robert Gooley; Liam McCormick; Adam J Brown; Dennis T L Wong
Journal:  Cardiovasc Diagn Ther       Date:  2022-06

Review 3.  Alternative methods for functional assessment of intermediate coronary lesions.

Authors:  Martyna Zaleska; Łukasz Kołtowski; Jakub Maksym; Mariusz Tomaniak; Maksymilian Opolski; Janusz Kochman
Journal:  Cardiol J       Date:  2019-03-26       Impact factor: 2.737

4.  Fractional flow reserve, quantitative flow ratio, and instantaneous wave-free ratio: a comparison of the procedure-related dose of ionising radiation.

Authors:  Greta Ziubryte; Gediminas Jarusevicius
Journal:  Postepy Kardiol Interwencyjnej       Date:  2021-03-27       Impact factor: 1.426

Review 5.  Angiography-Based Fractional Flow Reserve: State of the Art.

Authors:  Alessandra Scoccia; Mariusz Tomaniak; Tara Neleman; Frederik T W Groenland; Annemieke C Ziedses des Plantes; Joost Daemen
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2022-04-18       Impact factor: 3.955

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.