CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Scientific Library

Abstract

Recommended Article

Diagnostic accuracy of intracoronary optical coherence tomography-derived fractional flow reserve for assessment of coronary stenosis severity Clinical Outcomes Following Coronary Bifurcation PCI Techniques: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis Comprising 5,711 Patients Updated Expert Consensus Statement on Platelet Function and Genetic Testing for Guiding P2Y12 Receptor Inhibitor Treatment in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Risk of Cardiovascular Diseases Among Older Breast Cancer Survivors in the United States: A Matched Cohort Study Novel Transcatheter Mitral Valve Prosthesis for Patients With Severe Mitral Annular Calcification Pulmonary Hypertension Caused by a Coconut Left Atrium Refined balloon pulmonary angioplasty for inoperable patients with chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension Chronic Total Occlusion Interventions: Update on Current Tips and Tricks

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.