Diagnostic accuracy of a novel optical coherence tomography-based fractional flow reserve algorithm for assessment of coronary stenosis significance
, 3, 1, 1, 4, 4, 3, 3, 15
Abstract
Background: This study aimed to introduce a novel optical coherence tomography-derived fractional flow reserve (FFR) computational approach and assess the diagnostic performance of the algorithm for assessing physiological function.
Methods: The fusion of coronary optical coherence tomography and angiography was used to generate a novel FFR algorithm (AccuFFRoct) to evaluate functional ischemia of coronary stenosis. In the current study, a total of 34 consecutive patients were included, and AccuFFRoct was used to calculate the FFR for these patients. With the wire-measured FFR as the reference standard, we evaluated the performance of our approach by accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV).
Results: Per vessel accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV for AccuFFRoct in identifying hemodynamically significant coronary stenosis were 93.8%, 94.7%, 92.3%, 94.7%, and 92.3%, respectively, were found. Good correlation (Pearson’s correlation coefficient r = 0.80, p < 0.001) between AccuFFRoct and FFR was observed. The Bland-Altman analysis showed a mean difference value of –0.037 (limits of agreement: –0.189 to 0.115). The area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC) of AccuFFRoct in identifying physiologically significant stenosis was 0.94, which was higher than the minimum lumen area (MLA, AUC = 0.91) and significantly higher than the diameter stenosis (%DS, AUC = 0.78).
Conclusions: This clinical study shows the efficiency and accuracy of AccuFFRoct for clinical implementation when using invasive FFR measurement as a reference. It could provide important insights into coronary imaging superior to current methods based on the degree of coronary artery stenosis.
Keywords: optical coherence tomographyangiographycoronary stenosisthree-dimensional reconstructionfractional flow reserve
References
- Khera AV, Kathiresan S. Genetics of coronary artery disease: discovery, biology and clinical translation. Nat Rev Genet. 2017; 18(6): 331–344.
- Jia H, Dai J, Hou J, et al. Effective anti-thrombotic therapy without stenting: intravascular optical coherence tomography-based management in plaque erosion (the EROSION study). Eur Heart J. 2017; 38(11): 792–800.
- Windecker S, Kolh P, Alfonso F, et al. 2014 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization: The Task Force on Myocardial Revascularization of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS)Developed with the special contribution of the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI). Eur Heart J. 2014; 35(37): 2541–2619.
- Jones DA, Rathod KS, Koganti S, et al. Angiography alone versus angiography plus optical coherence tomography to Guide percutaneous coronary intervention: Outcomes from the Pan-London PCI Cohort. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2018; 11(14): 1313–1321.
- Huang J, Emori H, Ding D, et al. Diagnostic performance of intracoronary optical coherence tomography-based versus angiography-based fractional flow reserve for the evaluation of coronary lesions. EuroIntervention. 2020; 16(7): 568–576.
- Lee KE, Lee SHo, Shin ES, et al. A vessel length-based method to compute coronary fractional flow reserve from optical coherence tomography images. Biomed Eng Online. 2017; 16(1): 83.
- Yu W, Huang J, Jia D, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of intracoronary optical coherence tomography-derived fractional flow reserve for assessment of coronary stenosis severity. EuroIntervention. 2019; 15(2): 189–197.
- Dijkstra EW. A note on two problems in connexion with graphs. Numerische Mathematik. 1959; 1(1): 269–271.
- van der Zwet PM, Reiber JH. A new approach for the quantification of complex lesion morphology: the gradient field transform; basic principles and validation results. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1994; 24(1): 216–224.
- Jiang J, Feng Li, Li C, et al. Fractional flow reserve for coronary stenosis assessment derived from fusion of intravascular ultrasound and X-ray angiography. Quant Imaging Med Surg. 2021; 11(11): 4543–4555.
- Schafer S, Singh V, Hoffmann K, et al. Planning image-guided endovascular interventions: guidewire simulation using shortest path algorithms. SPIE Proceedings. 2007.
- Gibson CM, Cannon CP, Daley WL, et al. TIMI frame count: a quantitative method of assessing coronary artery flow. Circulation. 1996; 93(5): 879–888.
- 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.
- Jiang W, Pan Y, Hu Y, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of coronary computed tomography angiography-derived fractional flow reserve. Biomed Eng Online. 2021; 20(1): 77.
- 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.
- Xaplanteris P, Fournier S, Pijls NHJ, et al. Five-year outcomes with PCI guided by fractional flow reserve. N Engl J Med. 2018; 379(3): 250–259.
- Toth GG, Johnson NP, Jeremias A, et al. Standardization of Fractional Flow Reserve Measurements. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016; 68(7): 742–753.
- Toth GG, Toth B, Johnson NP, et al. Revascularization decisions in patients with stable angina and intermediate lesions: results of the international survey on interventional strategy. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2014; 7(6): 751–759.
- 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.
- Di Mario C, Demola P. Morphology and physiology together: Is optical coherence tomography the one-stop-shop of invasive cardiology? Cardiol J. 2020; 27(4): 345–346.
