| Literature DB >> 34277736 |
Wenjie Zuo1, Renhua Sun2, Xiaoguo Zhang1, Yangyang Qu1, Zhenjun Ji1, Yamin Su1, Rui Zhang1, Genshan Ma1.
Abstract
Background: This study aimed to examine whether quantitative flow ratio (QFR), an angiography-based computation of fractional flow reserve, was associated with intravascular imaging-defined vulnerable plaque features, such as thin cap fibroatheroma (TCFA) in patients with stable angina, and non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome.Entities:
Keywords: fractional flow reserve (FFR); intravascular ultrasound (IVUS); optical coherence tomography (OCT); plaque vulnerability; quantitative flow ratio (QFR)
Year: 2021 PMID: 34277736 PMCID: PMC8278311 DOI: 10.3389/fcvm.2021.690262
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Cardiovasc Med ISSN: 2297-055X
Figure 1Representative cases of hemodynamic and intravascular evaluations. (A) Coronary angiography showed a lesion with 50% diameter stenosis in the left anterior descending artery (the red arrow). (B) 3D vessel reconstruction with a QFR of 0.75. (C) OCT-TCFA: a lipid-rich plaque with the thinnest fibrous cap <65 μm (white arrows). (D) Coronary angiography showed a lesion with 50% diameter stenosis in the right coronary artery (the red arrow). (E) 3D vessel reconstruction with a QFR of 0.84. (F) VH-caTCFA (white arrows): necrotic core is coded as red, dense calcium as white, fibrous tissue as dark green, and fibrofatty tissue as light green. *guidewire artifact. QFR, quantitative flow ratio; OCT-TCFA, optical coherence tomography-thin cap fibroatheroma; VH-caTCFA, virtual histology-calcified thin cap fibroatheroma.
Figure 2Study flow diagram. IVUS, intravascular ultrasound; OCT, optical coherence tomography; STEMI, ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction; VH-IVUS, virtual histology intravascular ultrasound.
Baseline characteristics of included patients and lesions.
| Patient No. | 79 | 47 |
| Age, years | 61.5 ± 9.7 | 63.5 ± 10.0 |
| Male | 46 (58.2) | 29 (61.7) |
| Body mass index, kg/m2 | 25.2 ± 3.6 | 25.1 ± 4.6 |
| Hypertension | 57 (72.2) | 34 (72.3) |
| Diabetes mellitus | 17 (21.5) | 12 (25.5) |
| Dyslipidemia | 16 (20.3) | 13 (27.7) |
| Smoking | 18 (22.8) | 11 (23.4) |
| Previous MI | 1 (1.3) | 1 (2.1) |
| Previous PCI | 7 (8.9) | 3 (6.4) |
| LVEF, % | 69.5 (66.0–74.0) | 69.1 (66.0–75.0) |
| Triglyceride, mmol/L | 1.4 (0.9–2.2) | 1.3 (1.0–2.1) |
| Total cholesterol, mmol/L | 4.2 (3.7–5.0) | 4.3 (3.4–4.9) |
| LDL cholesterol, mmol/L | 2.4 (1.9–3.1) | 2.4 (2.0–3.1) |
| HDL cholesterol, mmol/L | 1.2 (1.0–1.4) | 1.2 (1.0–1.4) |
| Stable angina | 26 (32.9) | 20 (42.6) |
| Unstable angina | 29 (36.7) | 25 (53.2) |
| NSTEMI | 24 (30.4) | 2 (4.2) |
| Aspirin | 23 (29.1) | 12 (25.5) |
| Statins | 20 (25.3) | 11 (23.4) |
| | 12 (15.2) | 5 (10.6) |
| ACEIs/ARBs | 19 (24.1) | 15 (31.9) |
| Calcium channel blockers | 33 (41.8) | 15 (31.9) |
| Lesion No. | 83 | 49 |
| LAD | 62 (74.7) | 39 (79.6) |
| LCX | 10 (12.0) | 3 (6.1) |
| RCA | 11 (13.3) | 7 (14.3) |
| Diameter stenosis, % | 40.4 (34.3–49.4) | 45.6 (37.5–48.4) |
| Lesion length, mm | 15.9 (11.4–22.6) | 20.3 (12.0–26.4) |
| MLD, mm | 1.6 (1.3–1.9) | 1.6 (1.5–1.9) |
| QFR | 0.88 (0.83–0.95) | 0.87 (0.82–0.93) |
Values are expressed as n (%) or mean ± standard deviation or median (interquartile range). ACEI, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor; ARB, angiotensin receptor inhibitor; HDL, high-density lipoprotein; IVUS, intravascular ultrasound; LAD, left anterior descending artery; LCX, left circumflex artery; LDL, low-density lipoprotein; LVEF, left ventricular ejection fraction; MI, myocardial infarction; MLD, minimal lumen diameter; NSTEMI, non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction; OCT, optical coherence tomography; PCI, percutaneous coronary intervention; QCA, quantitative coronary angiography; QFR, quantitative flow ratio; RCA, right coronary artery.
OCT characteristics according to QFR tertiles.
| MLA, mm2 | 2.03 (1.47–2.97) | 2.30 (2.05–3.07) | 3.63 (2.82–4.30) | <0.001 | 0.901 | <0.001 | 0.002 |
| Area stenosis, % | 68.1 ± 12.8 | 60.1 ± 9.0 | 54.2 ± 13.7 | <0.001 | 0.033 | <0.001 | 0.170 |
| Lipid-rich plaques | 28 (100.0) | 23 (79.3) | 23 (88.5) | 0.028 | 0.023 | 0.105 | 0.475 |
| Average lipid arc, ° | 155 (135–202) | 153 (107–185) | 126 (105–165) | 0.019 | 0.606 | 0.015 | 0.433 |
| Maximum lipid arc, ° | 320 (198–360) | 220 (180–300) | 200 (150–310) | 0.017 | 0.086 | 0.025 | 1.000 |
| Lipid length, mm | 18.5 (11.6–22.4) | 12.5 (8.0–21.0) | 12.0 (8.0–18.0) | 0.223 | – | – | – |
| Lipid index, ° × mm | 2,527 (1,973–3,844) | 1,756 (1,085–3,648) | 1,574 (578–2,415) | 0.058 | – | – | – |
| Thinnest FCT, μm | 73 (43–148) | 150 (70–190) | 120 (70–180) | 0.040 | 0.058 | 0.157 | 1.000 |
| TCFAs | 14 (50.0) | 4 (13.8) | 5 (19.2) | 0.005 | 0.003 | 0.018 | 0.721 |
| Plaque rupture | 4 (14.3) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (3.8) | 0.057 | 0.052 | 0.353 | 0.473 |
| Plaque erosion | 6 (21.4) | 1 (3.4) | 3 (11.5) | 0.101 | 0.052 | 0.470 | 0.335 |
| Thrombus | 11 (39.3) | 1 (3.4) | 3 (11.5) | 0.002 | 0.001 | 0.020 | 0.335 |
| Calcification | 14 (50.0) | 14 (48.3) | 9 (34.6) | 0.463 | 0.896 | 0.253 | 0.305 |
| Calcified nodules | 2 (7.1) | 1 (3.4) | 2 (7.7) | 0.735 | 0.611 | 1.000 | 0.598 |
| Microchannels | 9 (32.1) | 9 (31.0) | 11 (42.3) | 0.634 | 0.928 | 0.440 | 0.386 |
| Macrophage accumulation | 15 (53.6) | 9 (31.0) | 10 (38.5) | 0.213 | 0.085 | 0.266 | 0.563 |
| Cholesterol crystals | 10 (35.7) | 11 (37.9) | 8 (30.8) | 0.852 | 0.862 | 0.700 | 0.577 |
Values are expressed as n (%) or mean ± standard deviation or median (interquartile range). FCT, fibrous cap thickness; MLA, minimal lumen area; TCFA, thin cap fibroatheroma; other abbreviations as .
Figure 3OCT-derived morphological characteristics stratified by QFR tertiles. (A) The prevalence of OCT-TCFA was the highest in QFR-T1; however, it was not significantly different between QFR-T2 and QFR-T3. (B) The prevalence of lipid-rich plaques was the highest in QFR-T1, although no significance was observed in pairwise comparisons after Bonferroni adjustment. (C) Compared with the other tertiles, thrombosis is more likely to occur in QFR-T1. (D) QFR-T3 had a significantly larger OCT-MLA than the other tertiles. (E) There was an overall difference in the thinnest FCT among tertiles but no pairwise comparison was significant. (F) The maximum lipid arc was significantly different among tertiles. FCT, fibrous cap thickness; OCT-MLA, optical coherence tomography-minimal lumen area; other abbreviations as in Figure 1.
IVUS characteristics according to QFR groups.
| Lesion No. | 26 | 23 | – |
| Grayscale IVUS findings | |||
| EEM CSA, mm2 | 12.3 (10.6–14.7) | 12.4 (10.8–16.1) | 0.515 |
| Plaque + media, mm2 | 8.9 (7.5–10.7) | 8.7 (7.0–10.3) | 0.771 |
| Plaque burden, % | 73.2 (68.0–77.7) | 66.5 (64.0–72.9) | 0.036 |
| MLA, mm2 | 3.5 (2.8–4.1) | 4.1 (3.4–4.9) | 0.025 |
| Reference EEM CSA, mm2 | 13.1 (11.2–14.5) | 13.0 (10.3–17.0) | 0.528 |
| Remodeling index | 0.96 (0.80–1.10) | 0.92 (0.81–1.08) | 0.787 |
| Positive remodeling | 11 (42.3) | 7 (30.4) | 0.390 |
| Negative remodeling | 13 (50.0) | 13 (56.5) | 0.648 |
| Lesion No. | 20 | 20 | – |
| VH-IVUS findings | |||
| Fibrous tissue, mm2 | 2.7 (2.0–4.5) | 2.7 (1.8–4.0) | 0.678 |
| Fibrous tissue, % | 62.9 (52.9–69.5) | 56.2 (45.0–62.8) | 0.134 |
| Fibrofatty tissue, mm2 | 1.0 (0.6–1.8) | 1.8 (0.6–2.5) | 0.121 |
| Fibrofatty tissue, % | 16.6 (11.7–28.5) | 22.7 (17.9–46.8) | 0.142 |
| Necrotic core, mm2 | 0.7 (0.3–1.2) | 0.4 (0.2–1.2) | 0.478 |
| Necrotic core, % | 12.2 (7.0–20.8) | 9.7 (2.3–21.1) | 0.398 |
| Dense calcium, mm2 | 0.2 (0.0–0.4) | 0.1 (0.0–0.2) | 0.398 |
| Dense calcium, % | 3.3 (0.1–7.1) | 1.1 (0.0–6.5) | 0.565 |
| VH-TCFA | 3 (15.0) | 3 (15.0) | 1.000 |
Values are expressed as n (%) or median (interquartile range). CSA, cross-sectional area; EEM, external elastic membrane; VH-IVUS, virtual histology intravascular ultrasound; other abbreviations as .
Figure 4IVUS-derived morphological characteristics stratified by QFR groups. The grayscale IVUS cohort (n = 49) showed that the high QFR group had a larger IVUS-MLA (A) but a smaller plaque burden (B) compared to the low QFR group. However, the VH-IVUS subgroup (n = 40) showed that there was no significant difference in the frequency of VH-TCFA, (C) and plaque components (D) between the groups. VH-TCFA, virtual histology-thin cap fibroatheroma; other abbreviations as in Figures 1, 2.
Figure 5Receiver-operating characteristics curves of QFR to predict intravascular imaging-derived characteristics. The predictive ability of QFR was modest for (A) OCT-TCFA, (B) OCT-MLA < 3.5 mm2, (C) Plaque burden ≥70%, and (D) IVUS-MLA < 4 mm2.