Referral of patients for fractional flow reserve using quantitative flow ratio

• Published in: European heart journal cardiovascular imaging 2019-11, Vol.20 (11), p.1231-1238
• Main Authors: Smit, Jeff M, Koning, Gerhard, van Rosendael, Alexander R, El Mahdiui, Mohammed, Mertens, Bart J, Schalij, Martin J, Jukema, J Wouter, Delgado, Victoria, Reiber, Johan H C, Bax, Jeroen J, Scholte, Arthur J
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Aged; Coronary Angiography; Coronary Stenosis - diagnostic imaging; Coronary Stenosis - physiopathology; Female; Fractional Flow Reserve, Myocardial; Humans; Hydrodynamics; Imaging, Three-Dimensional; Male; Netherlands; Patient Selection; Referral and Consultation; Retrospective Studies; Risk Factors
• ISSN: 2047-2404; 2047-2412
• DOI: 10.1093/ehjci/jey187

Abstract Aims Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) is a recently developed technique to calculate fractional flow reserve (FFR) based on 3D quantitative coronary angiography and computational fluid dynamics, obviating the need for a pressure-wire and hyperaemia induction. QFR might be used to guide patient selection for FFR and subsequent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) referral in hospitals not capable to perform FFR and PCI. We aimed to investigate the feasibility to use QFR to appropriately select patients for FFR referral. Methods and results Patients who underwent invasive coronary angiography in a hospital where FFR and PCI could not be performed and were referred to our hospital for invasive FFR measurement, were included. Angiogram images from the referring hospitals were retrospectively collected for QFR analysis. Based on QFR cut-off values of 0.77 and 0.86, our patient cohort was reclassified to ‘no referral’ (QFR ≥0.86), referral for ‘FFR’ (QFR 0.78–0.85), or ‘direct PCI’ (QFR ≤0.77). In total, 290 patients were included. Overall accuracy of QFR to detect an invasive FFR of ≤0.80 was 86%. Based on a QFR cut-off value of 0.86, a 50% reduction in patient referral for FFR could be obtained, while only 5% of these patients had an invasive FFR of ≤0.80 (thus, these patients were incorrectly reclassified to the ‘no referral’ group). Furthermore, 22% of the patients that still need to be referred could undergo direct PCI, based on a QFR cut-off value of 0.77. Conclusion QFR is feasible to use for the selection of patients for FFR referral.