Key result
Instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) demonstrated excellent classification agreement with fractional flow reserve (FFR) in intermediate coronary stenoses (area under ROC curve = 86%).
Why the study?
Does instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) provide similar classification of intermediate coronary stenoses compared to fractional flow reserve (FFR) in patients with angiographically intermediate stenoses?
Observational (n=312)
Yes
Does instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) provide similar classification of intermediate coronary stenoses compared to fractional flow reserve (FFR) in patients with angiographically intermediate stenoses?
Effect estimate: AUC 86%
iFR shows excellent classification agreement with FFR for intermediate coronary stenoses, offering a vasodilator-independent alternative for physiological assessment in the catheterization laboratory.
May support iFR as vasodilator-free option in cath lab; leaves open randomized outcome trials versus FFR.
AIMS: To evaluate the classification agreement between instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) and fractional flow reserve (FFR) in patients with angiographic intermediate coronary stenoses. METHODS AND RESULTS: Three hundred and twelve patients (339 stenoses) with angiographically intermediate stenoses were included in this international clinical registry. The iFR was calculated using fully automated algorithms. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to identify the iFR optimal cut-point corresponding to FFR 0.8. The classification agreement of coronary stenoses as significant or non-significant was established between iFR and FFR and between repeated FFR measurements for each 0.05 quantile of FFR values, from 0.2 to 1. Close agreement was observed between iFR and FFR (area under ROC curve= 86%). The optimal iFR cut-off (for an FFR of 0.80) was 0.89. After adjustment for the intrinsic variability of FFR, the classification agreement (accuracy) between iFR and FFR was 94%. Amongst the stenoses classified as non-significant by iFR (>0.89) and as significant by FFR (≤0.8), 81% had associated FFR values located within the FFR "grey-zone" (0.75-0.8) and 41% within the 0.79-0.80 FFR range. CONCLUSIONS: In a population of intermediate coronary stenoses, the classification agreement between iFR and FFR is excellent and similar to that of repeated FFR measurements in the same sample. Vasodilator-independent assessment of intermediate stenosis seems applicable and may foster adoption of coronary physiology in the catheterisation laboratory.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Petraco et al. (2013) conducted an observational in Angiographic intermediate coronary stenoses (n=312). Instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) vs. Fractional flow reserve (FFR) was evaluated on Classification agreement between iFR and FFR (AUC 86%). Instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) demonstrated excellent classification agreement with fractional flow reserve (FFR) in intermediate coronary stenoses (area under ROC curve = 86%).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: