Key result
FFR outperforms iFR for predicting dobutamine stress echocardiography ischemia with an AUC of ~0.95.
Why the study?
The association between fractional flow reserve, instantaneous wave-free ratio, and dobutamine stress echocardiography in stable angina patients with intermediate coronary lesions is scant and controversial.
Does FFR or iFR better predict reversible ischaemia on dobutamine stress echocardiography in patients with stable CAD and intermediate lesions?
Observational (n=62)
Does FFR or iFR better predict reversible ischaemia on dobutamine stress echocardiography in patients with stable CAD and intermediate lesions?
In patients with stable CAD and intermediate lesions, FFR shows strong agreement with dobutamine stress echocardiography, significantly outperforming iFR.
FFR may better predict DSE ischaemia than iFR in intermediate lesions; leaves open whether physiology should guide decisions in stable CAD.
AIMS: The association between fractional flow reserve (FFR) and dobutamine stress echocardiography (DSE) in real-world stable angina patients is scant and controversial whereas no such comparison exists with instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR). The current retrospective study aimed to investigate the associations among these modalities in patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD) and intermediate coronary lesions. METHODS AND RESULTS: We studied 62 consecutive stable angina patients who underwent DSE and subsequently coronary angiography with FFR (in all 62) and iFR (in 46/62 patients) assessment of intermediate single-vessel lesions between 2014 and 2015. Using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves we sought to identify the optimal FFR and iFR cut-off points with the highest discriminative power to predict the DSE result. The kappa coefficient was used to assess the agreement between FFR, iFR and DSE. The mean age of the study cohort was 63.5±12 years and 35 (56.5%) were males. Thirteen (21%) lesions were adjudicated as causing reversible ischaemia on DSE. Using ROC (FFR predicting DSE result), the area under the curve was 0.952 (95% CI: 0.902 to 1), whereas for iFR it was 0.743 (95% CI: 0.560 to 0.927), pAUC comparison=0.03. The optimal FFR cut-off point predicting positive DSE was 0.80. There was strong agreement between DSE and FFR (kappa 0.682, p<0.001). There was only modest agreement between iFR and DSE (kappa 0.258, p=0.068) using a cut-off value of 0.9. CONCLUSIONS: In patients referred for evaluation of stable CAD, there was good agreement between DSE and FFR (87%) but less so with iFR (71.7%).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Panoulas et al. (2018) conducted an observational in Stable coronary artery disease with intermediate coronary lesions (n=62). Fractional flow reserve (FFR) and instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) vs. Dobutamine stress echocardiography (DSE) was evaluated on Discriminative power to predict the dobutamine stress echocardiography result (area under the ROC curve) (p=0.03). Fractional flow reserve strongly predicted dobutamine stress echocardiography results (AUC 0.952), significantly outperforming instantaneous wave-free ratio (AUC 0.743, p=0.03).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: