eISSN: 1897-4295
ISSN: 1734-9338
Advances in Interventional Cardiology/Postępy w Kardiologii Interwencyjnej
Current issue Archive Manuscripts accepted About the journal Editorial board Abstracting and indexing Subscription Contact Instructions for authors Publication charge Ethical standards and procedures
Editorial System
Submit your Manuscript
SCImago Journal & Country Rank
Search
Editorial Policies
Sarajevo Declaration on Integrity and Visibility of Scholarly Publications
4/2020
vol. 16
 
Share:
Send email
Share:
abstract:
Original paper

Contrast medium Pd/Pa ratio in comparison to fractional flow reserve, quantitative flow ratio and instantaneous wave-free ratio for evaluation of intermediate coronary lesions

Paweł Kleczyński
1
,
Artur Dziewierz
2
,
Łukasz Rzeszutko
2
,
Dariusz Dudek
2
,
Jacek Legutko
1

  1. Department of Interventional Cardiology, John Paul II Hospital, Institute of Cardiology, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland
  2. 2nd Department of Cardiology, University Hospital, Institute of Cardiology, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland
Adv Interv Cardiol 2020; 16, 4 (62): 384–390
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5114/aic.2020.101762
Online publish date: 2020/12/29
View full text Get citation
 
Introduction
Contrast medium Pd/Pa ratio (cFFR) was introduced as an alternative to fractional flow reserve (FFR). To assess the accuracy of cFFR in predicting of FFR, quantitative flow ratio (QFR) and instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR).

Material and methods
Resting Pd/Pa, cFFR, FFR, QFR, and iFR were measured in 110 intermediate coronary lesions. cFFR was obtained after intracoronary injection of contrast medium. FFR was measured after the intravenous administration of adenosine. QFR was derived from fixed empiric hyperemic flow velocity based on coronary angiography. iFR was calculated by measuring the resting pressure gradient across a coronary lesion during diastole.

Results
Forty-four patients with 110 intermediate coronary lesions were enrolled. Mean baseline Pd/Pa was 0.93 ±0.05. Mean cFFR value was similar to FFR value (0.83 ±0.09 vs. 0.81 ±0.09; p = 0.13) and QFR (0.81 ±0.1; p = 0.69) and iFR (0.90 ±0.07; p = 0.1). A total of 46 vessels (41.8%) had FFR ≤ 0.80, 50 (45.5%) vessels had cFFR ≤ 0.83, 44 (40.0%) vessels had QFR ≤ 0.80, and 38 (34.5%) vessels had iFR ≤ 0.89. An excellent agreement between cFFR and resting Pd/Pa, FFR, QFR, and iFR was confirmed (intraclass correlation coefficients of 0.83, 0.99, 0.98, and 0.88, respectively). The optimal cutoff value of cFFR was 0.83 for prediction of FFR ≤ 0.80 with sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 96.9%, 97.8%, and 97.3%, respectively. 100% sensitivity was observed for a cutoff value of 0.82 and 100% specificity for a cutoff value of 0.84; AUC = 0.998 (0.995–1.00); p < 0.001.

Conclusions
Contrast medium Pd/Pa ratio seems to be accurate in predicting the functional significance of borderline coronary lesions assessed with FFR, iFR, and QFR.

keywords:

coronary artery disease, fractional flow reserve, quantitative flow ratio, instantaneous wave free ratio, Pd/Pa
Termedia
About us Contact
Copyright notice Privacy policy Advertising policy Contact us
Quick links
Journals Books eBooks Events
© 2024 Termedia Sp. z o.o.
Developed by Bentus.