CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Advances in therapeutic interventions for patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension Outcomes of procedural complications in transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Rheumatic Aortic Stenosis Evaluation and Management of Aortic Stenosis in Chronic Kidney Disease: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association Risk Stratification in PAH Optimizing outcomes during left main percutaneous coronary intervention with intravascular ultrasound and fractional flow reserve: the current state of evidence Sotatercept for the Treatment of Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension CD163+ macrophages promote angiogenesis and vascular permeability accompanied by inflammation in atherosclerosis Coronary Atherosclerotic Precursors of Acute Coronary Syndromes Access Site and Outcomes for Unprotected Left Main Stem Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: An Analysis of the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society Database

Original Research2017 Dec;30(6):564-569.

JOURNAL:J Interv Cardiol. Article Link

Diagnostic accuracy of instantaneous wave free-ratio in clinical practice

Ding WY, Nair S, Appleby C. Keywords: fractional flow reserve; functional testing; instantaneous wave-free ratio; pressure wire studies

ABSTRACT


AIMS - To evaluate the correlation between iFR and FFR in real-world clinical practice.


METHODS AND RESULTS - Retrospective, single-centre study of 229 consecutive pressure-wire studies (np  = 158). Real-time iFR and FFR measurements were performed for angiographically borderline stenoses. Functionally significant stenoses were defined as iFR <0.86 or FFR ≤0.80. An iFR between 0.86 and 0.93 was considered within the grey zone (Hybrid approach). Median iFR and FFR (IQR) were 0.92 (0.87-0.95) and 0.83 (0.76-0.89), respectively. Pearson's correlation coefficient was 0.75 (P < 0.001). Bland-Altman plot showed a mean difference between iFR and FFR that remained consistent throughout the range of values. The optimal iFR cutoff was 0.91-sensitivity 80%, specificity 82% with ROC area under curve of 89%. Using the Hybrid iFR-FFR strategy, we demonstrated high accuracy of iFR results-sensitivity 95%, specificity 96%, PPV 95%, and NPV 96%. In addition, this method would have avoided adenosine in 56% of patients. Mean follow-up period was 17.2 (±3.4) months. All-cause mortality was 3.2% (np = 5) and repeat intervention was required in six lesions (2.6%).


CONCLUSIONS - This study demonstrates that iFR is a valuable adjunct to FFR using the Hybrid iFR-FFR strategy in a real-world population. The use of adenosine may be avoided in about half the cases.


© 2017, Wiley Periodicals, Inc.