CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Fractional Flow Reserve

Abstract

Recommended Article

Post-stenting fractional flow reserve vs coronary angiography for optimisation of percutaneous coronary intervention: TARGET-FFR trial Long-term Variations of FFR and iFR After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Physiological Stratification of Patients With Angina Due to Coronary Microvascular Dysfunction The Natural History of Nonculprit Lesions in STEMI: An FFR Substudy of the Compare-Acute Trial Fractional flow reserve-guided PCI for stable coronary artery disease The impact of downstream coronary stenoses on fractional flow reserve assessment of intermediate left main disease Coronary fractional flow reserve in bifurcation stenoses: what have we learned? Fractional Flow Reserve–Guided PCI as Compared with Coronary Bypass Surgery
|<<... 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 >>|

Original Research2018 Jan;11(1):e004613.

JOURNAL：Circ Cardiovasc Interv. Article Link

Diagnostic Performance of the Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio: Comparison With Fractional Flow Reserve

De Rosa S, Polimeni A, Indolfi C et al. Keywords: acute coronary syndrome; cardiovascular diagnostic technique; coronary artery disease; coronary stenosis; myocardial fractional flow; reserve

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND - Aim of the present study was to perform a meta-analysis of all available studies comparing the instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) with fractional flow reserve (FFR).


METHODS AND RESULTS - Published trials comparing the iFR with FFR were searched for in PubMed, Google Scholar, and Scopus electronic databases. A total of 23 studies were available for the analysis, including 6381 stenoses. First, a meta-analysis of all studies was performed exploring the correlation between FFR and iFR. Interestingly, we found good correlation (0.798 [0.78-0.82]) between the 2 indices (P<0.001). In addition, to evaluate the diagnostic performance of iFR to identify FFR-positive coronary stenoses, we performed an additional meta-analysis, summarizing the results of receiver operating characteristics analyses from individual studies reporting the area under the curve. Summing the results of these studies, we found that iFR has a good diagnostic performance for the identification of FFR-positive stenoses (area under the curve=0.88 [0.86-0.90]; P<0.001). Furthermore, our search results included 5 studies that compared iFR and FFR to a third independent reference standard. Interestingly, no significant differences between iFR and FFR were reported in those studies.

CONCLUSIONS - The present meta-analysis shows that iFR significantly correlates with standard FFR and shows a good diagnostic performance in identifying FFR-positive coronary stenoses. Finally, iFR and FFR have similar diagnostic efficiency for detection of ischemia-inducing stenoses when tested against a third comparator.

© 2018 American Heart Association, Inc.
>CBS CBS 2019

> CBS 2019 REGISTRATION

> CBS 2019 PROGRAM

> CBS 2019 CALL FOR SCIENCE

> CBS 2019 SPOTLIGHTS

 CBSMD

> CBSMD WEBSITE REGISTRATION

> EDUCATION CENTER

> RECOMMANDED PAPER

> TOP 10 RESEARCH PAPER

> PRE-READING

CBS 2019 CBS 2019 FACULTY Education Resource CBSMD Scientific Library
Copyright ⓒ CBS MD Nanjing China. All rights reserved. 京ICP备16025898号-11
联系我们| Top