CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Coronary Angiography after Cardiac Arrest — The Right Timing or the Right Patients? Current Perspectives on Coronavirus Disease 2019 and Cardiovascular Disease: A White Paper by the JAHA Editors Disrupting Fellow Education Through Group Texting: WhatsApp in Fellow Education? Alirocumab Reduces Total Nonfatal Cardiovascular and Fatal Events in the ODYSSEY OUTCOMES Trial Coronary Artery Calcium Is Associated with Left Ventricular Diastolic Function Independent of Myocardial Ischemia Incidence and Clinical Outcomes of Stent Fractures on the Basis of 6,555 Patients and 16,482 Drug-Eluting Stents From 4 Centers Optimal medical therapy improves clinical outcomes in patients undergoing revascularization with percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass grafting: insights from the Synergy Between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention with TAXUS and Cardiac Surgery (SYNTAX) trial at the 5-year follow-up Qualitative and Mixed Methods Provide Unique Contributions to Outcomes Research Randomized Trial of Stents Versus Bypass Surgery for Left Main Coronary Artery Disease: 5-Year Outcomes of the PRECOMBAT Study Is Acute heart failure a distinctive disorder? An analysis from BIOSTAT-CHF

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.