TY - JOUR
T1 - Accuracy of computational pressure-fluid dynamics applied to coronary angiography to derive fractional flow reserve
T2 - FLASH FFR
AU - Li, Jianping
AU - Gong, Yanjun
AU - Wang, Weimin
AU - Yang, Qing
AU - Liu, Bin
AU - Lu, Yuan
AU - Xu, Yawei
AU - Huo, Yunlong
AU - Yi, Tieci
AU - Liu, Jian
AU - Li, Yongle
AU - Xu, Shaopeng
AU - Zhao, Lei
AU - Ali, Ziad A.
AU - Huo, Yong
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 Oxford University Press. All rights reserved.
PY - 2020
Y1 - 2020
N2 - Aims Conventional fractional flow reserve (FFR) is measured invasively using a coronary guidewire equipped with a pressure sensor. A non-invasive derived FFR would eliminate risk of coronary injury, minimize technical limitations, and potentially increase adoption. We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of a computational pressure-flow dynamics derived FFR (caFFR), applied to coronary angiography, compared to invasive FFR. Methods The FLASH FFR study was a prospective, multicentre, single-arm study conducted at six centres in China. Eligible and results patients had native coronary artery target lesions with visually estimated diameter stenosis of 30–90% and diagnosis of stable or unstable angina pectoris. Using computational pressure-fluid dynamics, in conjunction with thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) frame count, applied to coronary angiography, caFFR was measured online in real-time and compared blind to conventional invasive FFR by an independent core laboratory. The primary endpoint was the agreement between caFFR and FFR, with a pre-specified performance goal of 84%. Between June and December 2018, matched caFFR and FFR measurements were performed in 328 coronary arteries. Total operational time for caFFR was 4.54 ± 1.48 min. caFFR was highly correlated to FFR (R = 0.89, P ¼ 0.76) with a mean bias of -0.002 ± 0.049 (95% limits of agreement -0.098 to 0.093). The diagnostic performance of caFFR vs. FFR was diagnostic accuracy 95.7%, sensitivity 90.4%, specificity 98.6%, positive predictive value 97.2%, negative predictive value 95.0%, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.979. .................................................................................................................................................................................................... Conclusions Using wire-based FFR as the reference, caFFR has high accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity. caFFR could eliminate the need of a pressure wire, technical error and potentially increase adoption of physiological assessment of coronary artery stenosis severity.
AB - Aims Conventional fractional flow reserve (FFR) is measured invasively using a coronary guidewire equipped with a pressure sensor. A non-invasive derived FFR would eliminate risk of coronary injury, minimize technical limitations, and potentially increase adoption. We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of a computational pressure-flow dynamics derived FFR (caFFR), applied to coronary angiography, compared to invasive FFR. Methods The FLASH FFR study was a prospective, multicentre, single-arm study conducted at six centres in China. Eligible and results patients had native coronary artery target lesions with visually estimated diameter stenosis of 30–90% and diagnosis of stable or unstable angina pectoris. Using computational pressure-fluid dynamics, in conjunction with thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) frame count, applied to coronary angiography, caFFR was measured online in real-time and compared blind to conventional invasive FFR by an independent core laboratory. The primary endpoint was the agreement between caFFR and FFR, with a pre-specified performance goal of 84%. Between June and December 2018, matched caFFR and FFR measurements were performed in 328 coronary arteries. Total operational time for caFFR was 4.54 ± 1.48 min. caFFR was highly correlated to FFR (R = 0.89, P ¼ 0.76) with a mean bias of -0.002 ± 0.049 (95% limits of agreement -0.098 to 0.093). The diagnostic performance of caFFR vs. FFR was diagnostic accuracy 95.7%, sensitivity 90.4%, specificity 98.6%, positive predictive value 97.2%, negative predictive value 95.0%, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.979. .................................................................................................................................................................................................... Conclusions Using wire-based FFR as the reference, caFFR has high accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity. caFFR could eliminate the need of a pressure wire, technical error and potentially increase adoption of physiological assessment of coronary artery stenosis severity.
KW - Angiography
KW - CFD
KW - Coronary artery
KW - FFR
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85085265189&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1093/CVR/CVZ289
DO - 10.1093/CVR/CVZ289
M3 - Article
C2 - 31693092
AN - SCOPUS:85085265189
SN - 0008-6363
VL - 116
SP - 1349
EP - 1356
JO - Cardiovascular Research
JF - Cardiovascular Research
IS - 7
ER -