CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Antithrombotic Therapy in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Acute Coronary Syndrome Step-by-step manual for planning and performing bifurcation PCI: a resource-tailored approach Incidence and Outcomes of Acute Coronary Syndrome After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Severe Aortic Valve Stenosis: 1-Year Results From the All-Comers NOTION Randomized Clinical Trial Ticagrelor with or without Aspirin in High-Risk Patients after PCI Causes, Timing, and Impact of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Interruption for Surgery (from the Patterns of Non-adherence to Anti-platelet Regimens In Stented Patients Registry) Stent Thrombosis Risk Over Time on the Basis of Clinical Presentation and Platelet Reactivity: Analysis From ADAPT-DES Association between Coronary Collaterals and Myocardial Viability in Patients with a Chronic Total Occlusion 2014 AHA/ACC Guideline for the Management of Patients with Non-ST-Elevation Acute Coronary Syndromes: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines High-sensitivity troponin in the evaluation of patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome: a stepped-wedge, cluster-randomised controlled trial

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.