Ta strona używa pliki cookies, w celu polepszenia użyteczności i funkcjonalności oraz w celach statystycznych. Dowiedz się więcej w Polityce prywatności.
Korzystając ze strony wyrażasz zgodę na używanie plików cookies, zgodnie z aktualnymi ustawieniami przeglądarki.
Akceptuję wykorzystanie plików cookies
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
1/2025
vol. 21
 
Share:
Share:
abstract:
Original paper

The role of aortic valve area in the quantitative flow ratio–fractional flow reserve discrepancy in patients with coronary artery disease and severe aortic stenosis

Artur Dziewierz
1, 2
,
Łukasz Rzeszutko
1, 2
,
Łukasz Niewiara
3, 4
,
Jacek Legutko
3, 4
,
Paweł Kleczyński
3, 4

  1. 2nd Department of Cardiology, Institute of Cardiology, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland
  2. Clinical Department of Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, University Hospital, Krakow, Poland
  3. Department of Interventional Cardiology, Institute of Cardiology, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland
  4. Clinical Department of Interventional Cardiology, St. John Paul II Hospital, Krakow, Poland
Adv Interv Cardiol 2025; 21, 1 (79): 80–87
Online publish date: 2025/03/04
View full text Get citation
 
Introduction:
The accuracy of fractional flow reserve (FFR) and quantitative flow ratio (QFR) in assessing coronary artery disease in severe aortic stenosis (AS) patients may be affected by the severity of AS.

Aim:
We investigated the relationship between aortic valve area (AVA) and the diagnostic performance of QFR in this context.

Material and methods:
We analyzed 416 intermediate coronary lesions in 221 severe AS patients using FFR and QFR, categorizing them based on AVA into two groups: AVA < 0.5 cm² and AVA ≥ 0.5 cm².

Results:
In all, 47 (21.2%) patients had an AVA < 0.5 cm². The median FFR and QFR values were comparable between groups, with a high agreement rate: interclass coefficient of 0.96 (95% CI: 0.94 to 0.97) for AVA < 0.5 cm² and 0.97 (95% CI: 0.97 to 0.98) for AVA ≥ 0.5 cm². Concordance in detecting significant ischemia was 96.3% for AVA ≥ 0.5 cm² but dropped to 86.5% for AVA < 0.5 cm², with discrepancies mainly in cases where FFR was negative and QFR positive. Multivariable analysis showed AVA and %DS as independent predictors of discordance; AVA ≥ 0.5 cm² had an OR of 0.229 (95% CI: 0.095 to 0.548; p < 0.001), and each 1% increase in %DS increased the odds by 1.070 (95% CI: 1.034 to 1.107; p < 0.001).

Conclusions:
In severe AS, QFR closely correlates with FFR. However, patients with AVA < 0.5 cm² might exhibit a higher incidence of false-positive ischemia detection by QFR.

keywords:

aortic stenosis, fractional flow reserve, quantitative flow ratio, functional assessment, discordance

Quick links
© 2025 Termedia Sp. z o.o.
Developed by Bentus.