CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

血流储备分数

科研文章

荐读文献

Long-term clinical outcome after fractional flow reserve-guided treatment in patients with angiographically equivocal left main coronary artery stenosis Comparison of Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography, Fractional Flow Reserve, and Perfusion Imaging for Ischemia Diagnosis Coronary Flow Reserve in the Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio/Fractional Flow Reserve Era: Too Valuable to Be Neglected The Natural History of Nonculprit Lesions in STEMI: An FFR Substudy of the Compare-Acute Trial Anatomical and Functional Computed Tomography for Diagnosing Hemodynamically Significant Coronary Artery Disease: A Meta-Analysis Identification of High-Risk Plaques Destined to Cause Acute Coronary Syndrome Using Coronary Computed Tomographic Angiography and Computational Fluid Dynamics Coronary CT Angiographic and Flow Reserve-Guided Management of Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart Disease Coronary fractional flow reserve in bifurcation stenoses: what have we learned? The impact of downstream coronary stenoses on fractional flow reserve assessment of intermediate left main disease Safety of the Deferral of Coronary Revascularization on the Basis of Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio and Fractional Flow Reserve Measurements in Stable Coronary Artery Disease and Acute Coronary Syndromes

Original ResearchMay, 2019

JOURNAL:EuroIntervention. Article Link

Diagnostic accuracy of intracoronary optical coherence tomography-derived fractional flow reserve for assessment of coronary stenosis severity

W Yu, JY Huang, SX Tu et al. Keywords: OCT based FFR; OFR; diagnostic accuracy; wire-based FFR; flow-limiting coronary stenosis

ABSTRACT


AIMS - A novel method for computation of fractional flow reserve (FFR) from optical coherence tomography (OCT) was developed recently. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of a new OCT-based FFR (OFR) computational approach, using wire-based FFR as the reference standard.


METHODS AND RESULTS - Patients who underwent both OCT and FFR prior to intervention were analysed. The lumen of the interrogated vessel and the ostia of the side branches were automatically delineated and used to compute OFR. Bifurcation fractal laws were applied to correct the change in reference lumen size due to the step-down phenomenon. OFR was compared with FFR, both using a cut-off value of 0.80 to define ischaemia. Computational analysis was performed in 125 vessels from 118 patients. Average FFR was 0.80±0.09. Accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value for OFR to identify FFR 0.80 was 90% (95% CI: 84-95), 87% (95% CI: 77-94), 92% (95% CI: 82-97), 92% (95% CI: 82-97), and 88% (95% CI: 77-95), respectively. The AUC was higher for OFR than minimal lumen area (0.93 [95% CI: 0.87-0.97] versus 0.80 [95% CI: 0.72-0.86], p=0.002). Average OFR analysis time was 55±23 seconds for each OCT pullback. Intra- and inter-observer variability in OFR analysis was 0.00±0.02 and 0.00±0.03, respectively.


CONCLUSIONS - OFR is a novel and fast method allowing assessment of flow-limiting coronary stenosis without pressure wire and induced hyperaemia. The good diagnostic accuracy and low observer variability bear the potential of improved integration of intracoronary imaging and physiological assessment.