CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Mathematical modelling of endovascular drug delivery: balloons versus stents Rivaroxaban for Thromboprophylaxis in High-Risk Ambulatory Patients With Cancer Impact of Transcatheter Mitral Valve Repair on Preprocedural and Postprocedural Hospitalization Rates Implications of the local hemodynamic forces on the formation and destabilization of neoatherosclerotic lesions Prospective Evaluation of Transseptal TMVR for Failed Surgical Bioprostheses: MITRAL Trial Valve-in-Valve Arm 1-Year Outcomes Strain-Guided Management of Potentially Cardiotoxic Cancer Therapy Risk of Cardiovascular Diseases Among Older Breast Cancer Survivors in the United States: A Matched Cohort Study Long-Term Outcomes of Patients With Mediastinal Radiation–Associated Coronary Artery Disease Undergoing Coronary Revascularization With Percutaneous Coronary Intervention and Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Ablation Versus Drug Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation in Heart Failure Results From the CABANA Trial Cardio-oncology: A Focus on Cardiotoxicity

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.