Dowling Cameron, Michail Michael, Zhang Jun Michael, Comella Andrea, Thakur Udit, Gooley Robert, McCormick Liam, Brown Adam J, Wong Dennis T L
MonashHeart, Monash Health and Monash Cardiovascular Research Centre, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Sussex Cardiac Centre, Brighton and Sussex University Hospitals NHS Trust, Brighton, UK.
Cardiovasc Diagn Ther. 2022 Jun;12(3):314-324. doi: 10.21037/cdt-21-574.
Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) may be used to assess the functional significance of coronary lesions. Only limited validation exists for this technology in the setting of severe aortic stenosis.
A prospective study was performed on patients who were being considered for transcatheter aortic valve implantation. QFR analysis was performed (Medis Medical Imaging System, Leiden, The Netherlands) and compared to invasive measurements of haemodynamic assessment [fractional flow reserve (FFR), instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR), diastolic pressure ratio during the wave-free period (dPR) and distal arterial pressure/arterial pressure (Pd/Pa)].
A total of 35 patients were included in the study. Mean age was 75.5±6.5 and mean aortic valve gradient was 44.3±11.8 mmHg. There were 57 vessels analysed. The mean FFR was 0.83±0.10 and 22 vessels (39%) had a functionally significant FFR ≤0.80. QFR demonstrated a discriminatory power to predict functionally significant FFR [area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), 0.92; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.84 to 1.00], representing a sensitivity of 73%, specificity of 91%, positive predictive value of 84%, negative predictive value of 84% and an accuracy of 84%. QFR also demonstrated a discriminatory power to predict functionally significant iFR ≤0.89 (AUC =0.92; 95% CI: 0.85 to 0.99), dPR ≤0.89 (AUC =0.90; 95% CI: 0.83 to 0.98) and Pd/Pa ≤0.92 (AUC =0.89; 95% CI: 0.80 to 0.97).
QFR demonstrates acceptable diagnostic performance in patients with severe aortic stenosis when both FFR and non-hyperaemic pressure indices are used as reference standards.
定量血流比(QFR)可用于评估冠状动脉病变的功能意义。在严重主动脉瓣狭窄的情况下,这项技术仅有有限的验证。
对正在考虑经导管主动脉瓣植入术的患者进行了一项前瞻性研究。进行了QFR分析(使用荷兰莱顿的Medis医学成像系统),并与血流动力学评估的侵入性测量结果[血流储备分数(FFR)、瞬时无波比值(iFR)、无波期舒张期压力比值(dPR)和远端动脉压/动脉压(Pd/Pa)]进行比较。
共有35例患者纳入研究。平均年龄为75.5±6.5岁,平均主动脉瓣压差为44.3±11.8 mmHg。共分析了57条血管。平均FFR为0.83±0.10,22条血管(39%)的FFR≤0.80具有功能意义。QFR显示出预测具有功能意义的FFR的鉴别能力[受试者操作特征曲线下面积(AUC)为0.92;95%置信区间(CI):0.84至1.00],敏感性为73%,特异性为91%,阳性预测值为84%,阴性预测值为84%,准确性为84%。QFR还显示出预测具有功能意义的iFR≤0.89(AUC =0.92;95% CI:0.85至0.99)、dPR≤0.89(AUC =0.90;95% CI:0.83至0.98)和Pd/Pa≤0.92(AUC =0.89;95% CI:0.80至0.97)的鉴别能力。
当FFR和非充血压力指数均用作参考标准时,QFR在严重主动脉瓣狭窄患者中显示出可接受的诊断性能。