Agreement Between Invasive Wire-Based and Angiography-Based Vessel Fractional Flow Reserve Assessment on Intermediate Coronary Stenoses

• Published in: Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine 2021-06, Vol.8, p.707454-707454
• Main Authors: Chang, Chun-Chin, Lee, Yin-Hao, Chuang, Ming-Ju, Hsueh, Chien-Hung, Lu, Ya-Wen, Tsai, Yi-Lin, Chou, Ruey-Hsing, Wu, Cheng-Hsueh, Lu, Tse-Min, Huang, Po-Hsun, Lin, Shing-Jong, van Geuns, Robert-Jan
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Cardiovascular Medicine; coronary artery disease; fractional flow reserve; percutaneous coronary intervention; resting full-cycle ratio; vessel fractional flow reserve
• ISSN: 2297-055X; 2297-055X
• DOI: 10.3389/fcvm.2021.707454

Background: Angiography-based functional assessment of coronary stenoses emerges as a novel approach to assess coronary physiology. We sought to investigate the agreement between invasive coronary wire-based fractional flow reserve (FFR), resting full-cycle ratio (RFR), and angiography-based vessel FFR (vFFR) for the functional assessment of coronary stenoses in patients with coronary artery disease. Materials and Methods: Between Jan 01, 2018, and Dec 31, 2020, 298 patients with 385 intermediate lesions received invasive coronary wire-based functional assessment (FFR, RFR or both) at a single tertiary medical center. Coronary lesions involving ostium or left main artery were excluded. vFFR analysis was performed retrospectively based on aortic root pressure and two angiographic projections. Results: In total, 236 patients with 291 lesions were eligible for vFFR analysis. FFR and RFR were performed in 258 and 162 lesions, respectively. The mean FFR, RFR and vFFR value were 0.84 ± 0.08, 0.90 ± 0.09, and 0.83 ± 0.10. vFFR was significantly correlated with FFR ( r = 0.708, P < 0.001) and RFR ( r = 0.673, P < 0.001). The diagnostic performance of vFFR vs. FFR was accuracy 81.8%, sensitivity 77.4%, specificity 83.9%, positive predictive value 69.9%, and negative predictive value 88.5%. The discriminative power of vFFR for FFR ≤ 0.80 or RFR ≤ 0.89 was excellent. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was 0.87 (95% CI:0.83–0.92) for FFR and 0.80 (95% CI:0.73–0.88) for RFR. Conclusion: Angiography-based vFFR has a substantial agreement with invasive wire-based FFR and RFR in patients with intermediate coronary stenoses. vFFR can be utilized to assess coronary physiology without a pressure wire in a post hoc manner.