Back to news list

Diagnostic accuracy of QFR vs vFFR

Under the leadership of CV Bourantas, MD and A Baumbach, MD, Barts Heart Center, London, UK, CY Lin, MD from Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, Zhejiang university, Hangzhou, China and others, presented at ESC 2019 a very interesting poster comparing the diagnostic accuracy of QFR vs vFFR and using FFR as gold standard based on data acquired at 7.5 f/s coronary angiography. A total of 101 vessels (82 patients) were included in the final analysis. The results demonstrated that fixed QFR (fQFR) and contrast QFR (cQFR) a good correlation with FFR (r=0.694 and r=0.674), respectively, while vFFR showed moderate correlation (r=0.388). Similarly, fQFR and cQFR showed good accuracy for the detection of significant coronary stenosis (FFR<0.8) with AUC of 0.882 and 0.886, respectively, while vFFR showed moderate accuracy (AUC=0.719).

Their conclusion: Functional assessment of intermediate coronary stenosis based on 7.5 fps angiography derived computational modelling is feasible. Our study shows that fQFR and cQFR have a better diagnostic accuracy for detecting functionally significant coronary stenosis compared to vFFR. At the lower radiation-save
mode 7.5 fps angiography, cQFR does not appear to provide additional diagnostic accuracy compared to fQFR.