Background: Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) is a novel method for assessing hemodynamic relevance of a coronary lesion based on angiographic projections without the need of a pressure wire. Various studies demonstrated that QFR consistently related to fractional flow reserve (FFR); however, it is still unclear to what extent QFR reflects intraluminal stenosis parameters. Given that optical coherence tomography (OCT) is currently the gold standard to assess intraluminal stenosis parameters, we investigated the relationship between OCT-derived lesion geometry and QFR. Methods: We determined QFR in 97 lesions from 87 patients who underwent coronary angiography and OCT due to stable angina. QFR was measured with proprietary software and compared with OCT-based assessment of intraluminal stenosis parameters as well as lesion morphology. Results: Mean QFR was 0.79 ± 0.10. QFR demonstrated a consistent association with FFR (R = 0.834, p < 0.001). Interestingly, QFR was associated with OCT-derived parameters such as minimal lumen area (MLA, R = 0.390, p = 0.015), percent area stenosis (R = 0.412, p < 0.001), minimal lumen diameter (MLD, R = 0.395, p < 0.001), and percent diameter stenosis (R = 0.400, p < 0.001). Both minimal luminal area (ROC = 0.734, optimal cut-off 1.75 mm2) and minimal luminal diameter (ROC = 0.714, optimal cut-off 1.59 mm) presented a good diagnostic accuracy in diagnosing hemodynamic relevance (QFR ≤ 0.80). There was no significant association between QFR and anatomic features of plaque vulnerability. Conclusion: OCT-derived intraluminal stenosis parameters are related to QFR values and predict hemodynamic lesion relevance. The data supports the validity of QFR as 3D-vessel reconstruction method to assess coronary physiology without the need of a pressure wire.
Background: Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) is a novel method for assessing hemodynamic relevance of a coronary lesion based on angiographic projections without the need of a pressure wire. Various studies demonstrated that QFR consistently related to fractional flow reserve (FFR); however, it is still unclear to what extent QFR reflects intraluminal stenosis parameters. Given that optical coherence tomography (OCT) is currently the gold standard to assess intraluminal stenosis parameters, we investigated the relationship between OCT-derived lesion geometry and QFR. Methods: We determined QFR in 97 lesions from 87 patients who underwent coronary angiography and OCT due to stable angina. QFR was measured with proprietary software and compared with OCT-based assessment of intraluminal stenosis parameters as well as lesion morphology. Results: Mean QFR was 0.79 ± 0.10. QFR demonstrated a consistent association with FFR (R = 0.834, p < 0.001). Interestingly, QFR was associated with OCT-derived parameters such as minimal lumen area (MLA, R = 0.390, p = 0.015), percent area stenosis (R = 0.412, p < 0.001), minimal lumen diameter (MLD, R = 0.395, p < 0.001), and percent diameter stenosis (R = 0.400, p < 0.001). Both minimal luminal area (ROC = 0.734, optimal cut-off 1.75 mm2) and minimal luminal diameter (ROC = 0.714, optimal cut-off 1.59 mm) presented a good diagnostic accuracy in diagnosing hemodynamic relevance (QFR ≤ 0.80). There was no significant association between QFR and anatomic features of plaque vulnerability. Conclusion: OCT-derived intraluminal stenosis parameters are related to QFR values and predict hemodynamic lesion relevance. The data supports the validity of QFR as 3D-vessel reconstruction method to assess coronary physiology without the need of a pressure wire.
Authors: Guillermo J Tearney; Evelyn Regar; Takashi Akasaka; Tom Adriaenssens; Peter Barlis; Hiram G Bezerra; Brett Bouma; Nico Bruining; Jin-man Cho; Saqib Chowdhary; Marco A Costa; Ranil de Silva; Jouke Dijkstra; Carlo Di Mario; Darius Dudek; Darius Dudeck; Erling Falk; Erlin Falk; Marc D Feldman; Peter Fitzgerald; Hector M Garcia-Garcia; Hector Garcia; Nieves Gonzalo; Juan F Granada; Giulio Guagliumi; Niels R Holm; Yasuhiro Honda; Fumiaki Ikeno; Masanori Kawasaki; Janusz Kochman; Lukasz Koltowski; Takashi Kubo; Teruyoshi Kume; Hiroyuki Kyono; Cheung Chi Simon Lam; Guy Lamouche; David P Lee; Martin B Leon; Akiko Maehara; Olivia Manfrini; Gary S Mintz; Kyiouchi Mizuno; Marie-angéle Morel; Seemantini Nadkarni; Hiroyuki Okura; Hiromasa Otake; Arkadiusz Pietrasik; Francesco Prati; Lorenz Räber; Maria D Radu; Johannes Rieber; Maria Riga; Andrew Rollins; Mireille Rosenberg; Vasile Sirbu; Patrick W J C Serruys; Kenei Shimada; Toshiro Shinke; Junya Shite; Eliot Siegel; Shinjo Sonoda; Shinjo Sonada; Melissa Suter; Shigeho Takarada; Atsushi Tanaka; Mitsuyasu Terashima; Troels Thim; Thim Troels; Shiro Uemura; Giovanni J Ughi; Heleen M M van Beusekom; Antonius F W van der Steen; Gerrit-Anne van Es; Gerrit-Ann van Es; Gijs van Soest; Renu Virmani; Sergio Waxman; Neil J Weissman; Giora Weisz Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2012-03-20 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Stylianos A Pyxaras; Shengxian Tu; Emanuele Barbato; Giulia Barbati; Luigi Di Serafino; Frederic De Vroey; Gabor Toth; Fabio Mangiacapra; Gianfranco Sinagra; Bernard De Bruyne; Johan H C Reiber; William Wijns Journal: Am Heart J Date: 2013-10-17 Impact factor: 4.749
Authors: David J Maron; Judith S Hochman; Harmony R Reynolds; Sripal Bangalore; Sean M O'Brien; William E Boden; Bernard R Chaitman; Roxy Senior; Jose López-Sendón; Karen P Alexander; Renato D Lopes; Leslee J Shaw; Jeffrey S Berger; Jonathan D Newman; Mandeep S Sidhu; Shaun G Goodman; Witold Ruzyllo; Gilbert Gosselin; Aldo P Maggioni; Harvey D White; Balram Bhargava; James K Min; G B John Mancini; Daniel S Berman; Michael H Picard; Raymond Y Kwong; Ziad A Ali; Daniel B Mark; John A Spertus; Mangalath N Krishnan; Ahmed Elghamaz; Nagaraja Moorthy; Whady A Hueb; Marcin Demkow; Kreton Mavromatis; Olga Bockeria; Jesus Peteiro; Todd D Miller; Hanna Szwed; Rolf Doerr; Matyas Keltai; Joseph B Selvanayagam; P Gabriel Steg; Claes Held; Shun Kohsaka; Stavroula Mavromichalis; Ruth Kirby; Neal O Jeffries; Frank E Harrell; Frank W Rockhold; Samuel Broderick; T Bruce Ferguson; David O Williams; Robert A Harrington; Gregg W Stone; Yves Rosenberg Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2020-03-30 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Mariusz Tomaniak; Dorota Ochijewicz; Łukasz Kołtowski; Adam Rdzanek; Arkadiusz Pietrasik; Jacek Jąkała; Magdalena Slezak; Krzysztof P Malinowski; Martyna Zaleska; Jakub Maksym; Piotr Barus; Tomasz Roleder; Krzysztof J Filipiak; Grzegorz Opolski; Janusz Kochman Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2021-05-28 Impact factor: 4.241