open access
Agreement between Murray law-based quantitative flow ratio (μQFR) and three-dimensional quantitative flow ratio (3D-QFR) in non-selected angiographic stenosis: A multicenter study
, 2, 34, 1, 2, 5, 6, 1, 7, 25
Affiliations- Miguel Servet University Hospital, Zaragoza, Spain
- Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China
- Bundeswehrkrankenhaus (Federal Army Military Hospital), Hamburg, Germany
- Asklepios Klinik St. Georg (Asklepios St. Georg Clinic), Hamburg, Germany
- Bundeswehrzentralkrankenhaus (Federal Army Central Military Hospital), Koblenz, Germany
- Nursing High School, University of Valladolid, Valladolid, Spain
- Med-X Research Institute, School of Biomedical Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China
open access
Abstract
Background: The agreement between single-projection Murray-based quantitative flow ratio (mQFR) and conventional three-dimensional quantitative flow ratio (3D-QFR) has not been reported hitherto.
Methods: Patients from a multinational database were randomly selected for the study of agreement, according to sample size calculation. Both conventional 3D-QFR and mQFR were analyzed for all available arteries at a central corelab by independent analysts, blinded to each other’s results.
Results: Ninety-eight coronary arteries from 35 patients were finally analyzed. Median 3D-QFR was 0.82 (interquartile range 0.78–0.87). The intraclass correlation coefficient for the absolute agreement between 3D-QFR and mQFR was 0.996 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.993–0.997); Lin’s coefficient 0.996 (95% CI: 0.993–0.997), without constant or proportional bias (intercept = 0 and slope = 1 in orthogonal regression). As dichotomous variable, there was absolute agreement between mQFR and 3D-QFR, resulting in no single false positive or negative. Kappa index was 1 and the diagnostic accuracy 100%.
Conclusions: mQFR using a single angiographic projection showed almost perfect agreement with standard 3D-QFR. These results encourage the interchangeable use of mQFR and 3D-QFR, which can be interesting to improve QFR feasibility in retrospective studies, wherein appropriate double angiographic projections might be challenging to obtain.
Abstract
Background: The agreement between single-projection Murray-based quantitative flow ratio (mQFR) and conventional three-dimensional quantitative flow ratio (3D-QFR) has not been reported hitherto.
Methods: Patients from a multinational database were randomly selected for the study of agreement, according to sample size calculation. Both conventional 3D-QFR and mQFR were analyzed for all available arteries at a central corelab by independent analysts, blinded to each other’s results.
Results: Ninety-eight coronary arteries from 35 patients were finally analyzed. Median 3D-QFR was 0.82 (interquartile range 0.78–0.87). The intraclass correlation coefficient for the absolute agreement between 3D-QFR and mQFR was 0.996 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.993–0.997); Lin’s coefficient 0.996 (95% CI: 0.993–0.997), without constant or proportional bias (intercept = 0 and slope = 1 in orthogonal regression). As dichotomous variable, there was absolute agreement between mQFR and 3D-QFR, resulting in no single false positive or negative. Kappa index was 1 and the diagnostic accuracy 100%.
Conclusions: mQFR using a single angiographic projection showed almost perfect agreement with standard 3D-QFR. These results encourage the interchangeable use of mQFR and 3D-QFR, which can be interesting to improve QFR feasibility in retrospective studies, wherein appropriate double angiographic projections might be challenging to obtain.
Keywords
quantitative flow ratio, μQFR, coronary physiology, resting index, computational physiology, Murray law, coronary heart disease
About this articleTitle
Agreement between Murray law-based quantitative flow ratio (μQFR) and three-dimensional quantitative flow ratio (3D-QFR) in non-selected angiographic stenosis: A multicenter study
Journal
Issue
Article type
Original Article
Pages
388-395
Published online
2022-05-17
Page views
4762
Article views/downloads
723
DOI
Pubmed
Bibliographic record
Cardiol J 2022;29(3):388-395.
Keywords
quantitative flow ratio
μQFR
coronary physiology
resting index
computational physiology
Murray law
coronary heart disease
Authors
Carlos Cortés
Lili Liu
Scarlet Luisa Berdin
Pablo M. Fernández-Corredoira
Ruiyan Zhang
Ulrich Schäfer
María López
José A. Diarte
Shengxian Tu
Juan Luis Gutiérrez-Chico
References (27)- Bech GJ, De Bruyne B, Pijls NH, et al. Fractional flow reserve to determine the appropriateness of angioplasty in moderate coronary stenosis: a randomized trial. Circulation. 2001; 103(24): 2928–2934.
- Tonino PAL, De Bruyne B, Pijls NHJ, et al. Fractional flow reserve versus angiography for guiding percutaneous coronary intervention. N Engl J Med. 2009; 360(3): 213–224.
- De Bruyne B, Pijls NHJ, Kalesan B, et al. Fractional flow reserve-guided PCI versus medical therapy in stable coronary disease. N Engl J Med. 2012; 367(11): 991–1001.
- Davies J, Sen S, Dehbi HM, et al. Use of the Instantaneous Wave-free Ratio or Fractional Flow Reserve in PCI. N Engl J Med. 2017; 376(19): 1824–1834.
- Götberg M, Christiansen E, Gudmundsdottir I, et al. Instantaneous wave-free ratio versus fractional flow reserve to guide PCI. N Engl J Med. 2017; 376(19): 1813–1823.
- Toth G, Toth B, Johnson N, et al. Revascularization Decisions in Patients With Stable Angina and Intermediate Lesions. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2014; 7(6): 751–759.
- Härle T, Zeymer U, Hochadel M, et al. Real-world use of fractional flow reserve in Germany: results of the prospective ALKK coronary angiography and PCI registry. Clin Res Cardiol. 2017; 106(2): 140–150.
- Lee HS, Lee JM, Nam CW, et al. Consensus document for invasive coronary physiologic assessment in Asia-Pacific countries. Cardiol J. 2019; 26(3): 215–225.
- Gutiérrez-Chico JL, Zhao S, Chatzizisis YS. Vorticity: at the crossroads of coronary biomechanics and physiology. Atherosclerosis. 2018; 273: 115–116.
- Gutiérrez-Chico JL. Planning percutaneous interventions with optical flow ratio: "niu" odds in favour of imaging in the year of the Ox. EuroIntervention. 2021; 17(12): e958–e960.
- Ojeda S, Romaguera R, Cruz-González I, et al. [Spanish Cardiac Catheterization and Coronary Intervention Registry. 29th Official Report of the Interventional Cardiology Association of the Spanish Society of Cardiology (1990-2019)]. Rev Esp Cardiol. 2020; 73(11): 927–936.
- Neumann F-J, Sousa-Uva M, Ahlsson A, et al. 2018 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization. Eur Heart J. 2019; 40: 87–165.
- Tebaldi M, Biscaglia S, Fineschi M, et al. Evolving Routine Standards in Invasive Hemodynamic Assessment of Coronary Stenosis: The Nationwide Italian SICI-GISE Cross-Sectional ERIS Study. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2018; 11(15): 1482–1491.
- Gutiérrez-Chico JL, Chen Y, Yu W, et al. Diagnostic accuracy and reproducibility of optical flow ratio for functional evaluation of coronary stenosis in a prospective series. Cardiol J. 2020; 27(4): 350–361.
- Tu S, Barbato E, Köszegi Z, et al. Fractional flow reserve calculation from 3-dimensional quantitative coronary angiography and TIMI frame count: a fast computer model to quantify the functional significance of moderately obstructed coronary arteries. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2014; 7(7): 768–777.
- Li Y, Gutiérrez-Chico JL, Holm NR, et al. Impact of side branch modeling on computation of endothelial shear stress in coronary artery disease: coronary tree reconstruction by fusion of 3D angiography and OCT. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015; 66(2): 125–135.
- Tu S, Westra J, Yang J, et al. Diagnostic Accuracy of Fast Computational Approaches to Derive Fractional Flow Reserve From Diagnostic Coronary Angiography: The International Multicenter FAVOR Pilot Study. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016; 9(19): 2024–2035.
- Collet C, Onuma Y, Sonck J, et al. Diagnostic performance of angiography-derived fractional flow reserve: a systematic review and Bayesian meta-analysis. Eur Heart J. 2018; 39(35): 3314–3321.
- Cortés C, Carrasco-Moraleja M, Aparisi A, et al. Quantitative flow ratio-meta-analysis and systematic review. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2021; 97(5): 807–814.
- Yu W, Tanigaki T, Ding D, et al. Accuracy of intravascular ultrasound-based fractional flow reserve in identifying hemodynamic significance of coronary stenosis. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2021; 14(2): e009840.
- Li Z, Zhang J, Xu L, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of a fast computational approach to derive fractional flow reserve from coronary CT angiography. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2020; 13(1 Pt 1): 172–175.
- Cortés C, Rivero F, Gutiérrez-Ibañes E, et al. Prospective validation and comparison of new indexes for the assessment of coronary stenosis: resting full-cycle and quantitative flow ratio. Rev Esp Cardiol (Engl Ed). 2021; 74(1): 94–97.
- Tu S, Ding D, Chang Y, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of quantitative flow ratio for assessment of coronary stenosis significance from a single angiographic view: A novel method based on bifurcation fractal law. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2021; 97 (Suppl 2): 1040–1047.
- Murray CD. The physiological principle of minimum work: I. The vascular system and the cost of blood volume. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1926; 12(3): 207–214.
- Zhao Q, Li C, Chu M, et al. Angiography-based coronary flow reserve: The feasibility of automatic computation by artificial intelligence. Cardiol J. 2021 [Epub ahead of print].
- Cortés C, Rodríguez-Gabella T, Gutiérrez H, et al. Quantitative flow ratio in myocardial infarction for the evaluation of non-infarct-related arteries. The QIMERA pilot study. RECICE. 2019.
- Zhang J, Yao M, Jia X, et al. The efficacy and safety of quantitative flow ratio-guided complete revascularization in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease: A pilot randomized controlled trial. Cardiol J. 2021 [Epub ahead of print].
