The analysis showed an overall accuracy of ~80% for both iFR and Pd/Pa compared to FFR, with potential improvement to ≥90% in a subset of lesions.
Does the instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) and resting Pd/Pa provide comparable accuracy to fractional flow reserve (FFR) in assessing coronary lesions?
Patients with coronary lesions
Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio (iFR) and Resting Pd/Pa
Fractional Flow Reserve (FFR)
Overall accuracysurrogate
Nonhyperemic indices iFR and resting Pd/Pa demonstrate approximately 80% accuracy compared to FFR, indicating they may be useful alternatives to hyperemic assessment in selected patients.
Absolute Event Rate: 0% vs 0%
This comprehensive core laboratory analysis comparing iFR and Pd/Pa with FFR demonstrated an overall accuracy of ~80% for both nonhyperemic indices, which can be improved to ≥90% in a subset of lesions. Clinical outcome studies are required to determine whether the use of iFR or Pd/Pa might obviate the need for hyperemia in selected patients.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Allen Jeremias
Interventional Cardiology
Akiko Maehara
Interventional Cardiology
Philippe Généreux
Interventional Cardiology
Journal of the American College of Cardiology
Imperial College London
University of Amsterdam
Radboud University Nijmegen
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Jeremias et al. (Wed,) reported a other. The analysis showed an overall accuracy of ~80% for both iFR and Pd/Pa compared to FFR, with potential improvement to ≥90% in a subset of lesions.
synapsesocial.com/papers/6970ddc7da50910f9664e712 — DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2013.09.060