Dissemin is shutting down on January 1st, 2025

Published in

Oxford University Press, European Heart Journal - Cardiovascular Imaging, 2023

DOI: 10.1093/ehjci/jead197

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

The diagnostic performance of quantitative flow ratio and perfusion imaging in patients with prior coronary artery disease

This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.
This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.

Full text: Unavailable

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Orange circle
Postprint: archiving restricted
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

Abstract Aims In chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) patients with documented coronary artery disease (CAD), ischaemia detection by myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) and an invasive approach are viable diagnostic strategies. We compared the diagnostic performance of quantitative flow ratio (QFR) with single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), positron emission tomography (PET), and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) in patients with prior CAD [previous percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and/or myocardial infarction (MI)]. Methods and results This PACIFIC-2 sub-study evaluated 189 CCS patients with prior CAD for inclusion. Patients underwent SPECT, PET, and CMR followed by invasive coronary angiography with fractional flow reserve (FFR) measurements of all major coronary arteries (N = 567), except for vessels with a sub-total or chronic total occlusion. Quantitative flow ratio computation was attempted in 488 (86%) vessels with measured FFR available (FFR ≤0.80 defined haemodynamically significant CAD). Quantitative flow ratio analysis was successful in 334 (68%) vessels among 166 patients and demonstrated a higher accuracy (84%) and sensitivity (72%) compared with SPECT (66%, P < 0.001 and 46%, P = 0.001), PET (65%, P < 0.001 and 58%, P = 0.032), and CMR (72%, P < 0.001 and 33%, P < 0.001). The specificity of QFR (87%) was similar to that of CMR (83%, P = 0.123) but higher than that of SPECT (71%, P < 0.001) and PET (67%, P < 0.001). Lastly, QFR exhibited a higher area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (0.89) than SPECT (0.57, P < 0.001), PET (0.66, P < 0.001), and CMR (0.60, P < 0.001). Conclusion QFR correlated better with FFR in patients with prior CAD than MPI, as reflected in the higher diagnostic performance measures for detecting FFR-defined, vessel-specific, significant CAD.