Department of Cardiology, Cardiovascular Center, Ogikubo Hospital, 3-1-24, Imagawa, Suginami-ku, Tokyo, 167-0035, Japan.
Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2019 Nov;35(11):1963-1969. doi: 10.1007/s10554-019-01656-z. Epub 2019 Jun 26.
Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) is an image-based fractional flow reserve (FFR) computed by three-dimensional quantitative coronary angiography and estimated flow velocity. Several studies have reported that QFR was rapidly computed within approximately 5 min and had a good diagnostic performance as compared with FFR. However, studies comparing QFR with instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) as an index with a prognostic value comparable to that of FFR are limited. Thus, we investigated the applicability of QFR with respect to iFR, both being easy-to-measure indices not requiring pharmacological hyperaemic induction. We computed QFR in prospectively enrolled 150 coronary lesions (including 50 lesions for onsite QFR analysis) in consecutive patients with intermediate stenosis evaluated by iFR. The correlation and diagnostic performance of QFR were compared using iFR as a reference. The mean QFR and iFR were 0.81 ± 0.12 and 0.89 ± 0.11, respectively. QFR and iFR exhibited a good correlation in all subjects (R = 0.70, p < 0.0001) and the onsite-analysed vessels (R = 0.74, p < 0.0001). In the receiver-operating characteristics analysis, the area under the curve of QFR predicting iFR ≤ 0.89 was 0.91. Applying the cut-off value of QFR ≤ 0.80 and iFR ≤ 0.89, the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values were 85%, 83%, 72%, and 91%, respectively, in all subjects, and 82%, 82%, 78%, and 85%, respectively, in the onsite-analysed vessels. QFR including onsite analysis demonstrated a good correlation with iFR and a diagnostic performance comparable to that of iFR in consecutive patients with intermediate coronary stenosis, suggesting its potential as a rapidly derived index for evaluating myocardial ischaemia in clinical settings.
定量血流比(QFR)是一种基于三维定量冠状动脉造影和估计血流速度的图像衍生的分数血流量储备(FFR)。多项研究报告称,QFR 可在大约 5 分钟内快速计算,并且与 FFR 相比具有良好的诊断性能。然而,与作为与 FFR 相当的预后价值的即时无波比(iFR)进行比较的 QFR 研究有限。因此,我们研究了 QFR 相对于 iFR 的适用性,iFR 是两种易于测量的指数,均不需要药物引起的充血诱导。我们在连续接受 iFR 评估的中间狭窄病变患者中前瞻性纳入了 150 个冠状动脉病变(包括 50 个病变用于现场 QFR 分析),计算了 QFR。使用 iFR 作为参考,比较了 QFR 的相关性和诊断性能。所有受试者的平均 QFR 和 iFR 分别为 0.81 ± 0.12 和 0.89 ± 0.11。QFR 和 iFR 在所有受试者(R = 0.70,p < 0.0001)和现场分析的血管(R = 0.74,p < 0.0001)中均具有良好的相关性。在接受者操作特征分析中,预测 iFR ≤ 0.89 的 QFR 曲线下面积为 0.91。在所有受试者中,当 QFR 截断值为 ≤ 0.80 和 iFR ≤ 0.89 时,敏感性、特异性、阳性和阴性预测值分别为 85%、83%、72%和 91%,而在现场分析的血管中,敏感性、特异性、阳性和阴性预测值分别为 82%、82%、78%和 85%。包括现场分析的 QFR 与 iFR 具有良好的相关性,并且在连续的中间冠状动脉狭窄患者中与 iFR 的诊断性能相当,表明其作为评估临床环境中心肌缺血的快速衍生指标的潜力。