Clinical Trials Logo

Clinical Trial Details — Status: Completed

Administrative data

NCT number NCT02959814
Other study ID # 1-10-72-219-16
Secondary ID
Status Completed
Phase
First received
Last updated
Start date February 22, 2017
Est. completion date June 1, 2018

Study information

Verified date December 2019
Source Aarhus University Hospital Skejby
Contact n/a
Is FDA regulated No
Health authority
Study type Observational

Clinical Trial Summary

Quantitative Flow Ratio (QFR) is a novel method for evaluating the functional significance of coronary stenosis. QFR is assessed by calculation of the pressure in the vessel based on two angiographic projections. The purpose of the FAVOR II study is to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of on-line QFR compared to 2D Quantitative Coronary Angiography (QCA) with FFR as gold standard.


Description:

Background:

Patients at high risk of having one or more coronary stenosis are evaluated routinely by invasive coronary angiography (CAG). Lesions are often quantified by QCA, but fractional flow reserve is increasingly used to assess functional significance of identified stenosis. FFR is assessed during CAG by advancing a wire with a pressure transducer towards the stenosis and measure the ratio in pressure between the two sides of the stenosis during medical induced maximum blood flow (hyperaemia).

The solid evidence for FFR evaluation of coronary stenosis and the relative simplicity in performing the measurements have supported adoption of an FFR based strategy in many centers but the need for interrogating the stenosis by a pressure wire, the cost of the wire, and the drug inducing hyperaemia limits more widespread adoption.

Quantitative Flow Ratio is a novel method for evaluating the functional significance of coronary stenosis by calculation of the pressure drop in the vessel based on two angiographic projections.

The FAVOR I study (Tu et al.), showed promising results for core laboratory QFR analysis in selected patients.

The purpose of the FAVOR II study is to evaluate the feasibility and diagnostic precision of in-procedure QFR during CAG in comparison to QCA with FFR as gold standard for physiological lesion evaluation.

Hypothesis: QFR has superior sensitivity and specificity for detection of functional significant lesions in comparison to QCA with FFR as gold standard

Methods: Prospective, observational, multicenter study with inclusion of 310 patients.

Patients with indication for FFR are enrolled. At least two angiographic projections are acquired during resting conditions. QFR is calculated in-procedure using the Medis Suite application and simultaneously to the operator performing the FFR measurement. The QFR observer is blinded to the FFR measurement.

QFR is reassessed off-line by the Interventional Coronary Imaging Core Laboratory, Aarhus University, Denmark, blinded to FFR and in-procedure QFR results.

FFR is assessed by core laboratory reading, blinded to QFR results. All data are entered and stored in a protected and logged trial management system (TrialPartner, Aarhus University, Denmark).


Recruitment information / eligibility

Status Completed
Enrollment 329
Est. completion date June 1, 2018
Est. primary completion date October 17, 2017
Accepts healthy volunteers No
Gender All
Age group 18 Years and older
Eligibility Inclusion Criteria:

- Stable angina pectoris or secondary evaluation of stenosis after acute MI

- Age > 18 years

- Able to provide signed informed consent

- Angiographic inclusion criteria:

- Indication for FFR in at least one stenosis:

- Diameter stenosis of 30%-90% by visual estimate

- Reference vessel size > 2 mm in stenotic segment by visual estimate

Exclusion Criteria:

- Myocardial infarction within 72 hours

- Severe asthma or severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

- Severe heart failure (NYHA=III)

- S-creatinine>150µmol/L or GFR<45 ml/kg/1.73m2

- Allergy to contrast media or adenosine

- Atrial fibrillation

- Angiographic exclusion criteria:

Lesion specific

- Below 30% and above 90% diameter stenosis by visual estimate.

- Reference size of vessel below 2 mm by visual estimation.

- Ostial LMCA lesions

- Ostial RCA lesions

- Distal LMCA lesions in combination with proximal Cx lesions

- Other bifurcation stenosis with lesions on both sides of a major shift (>1mm) in reference diameter Angiographic quality

- Poor image quality precluding contour detection

- Good contrast filling not possible

- Severe overlap of stenosed segments

- Severe tortuosity of target vessel

Study Design


Intervention

Other:
QFR (observational)
QFR assessment by Medis Suite, Medis medical imaging B.V., The Netherlands

Locations

Country Name City State
Denmark Aarhus University Hspital Aarhus N
France Institut Cardiovasculaire Paris Sud Massy Massy
Germany Elizabeth Krankenhaus Essen Essen
Germany Universitätsklinikum Gießen Giessen
Italy Azienda ospedaliera Sant'Anna e S. sebastiano di Caserta Caserta
Italy Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Ferrara, University of Ferrara Ferrara
Italy Ospedale dell'Angelo di Mestre Mestre
Japan Gifu Heart Center Gifu
Netherlands HagaZiekenhuis The Hague
United Kingdom Golden Jubilee National Hospital Glasgow

Sponsors (1)

Lead Sponsor Collaborator
Aarhus University Hospital Skejby

Countries where clinical trial is conducted

Denmark,  France,  Germany,  Italy,  Japan,  Netherlands,  United Kingdom, 

References & Publications (1)

Tu S, Westra J, Yang J, von Birgelen C, Ferrara A, Pellicano M, Nef H, Tebaldi M, Murasato Y, Lansky A, Barbato E, van der Heijden LC, Reiber JH, Holm NR, Wijns W; FAVOR Pilot Trial Study Group. Diagnostic Accuracy of Fast Computational Approaches to Derive Fractional Flow Reserve From Diagnostic Coronary Angiography: The International Multicenter FAVOR Pilot Study. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016 Oct 10;9(19):2024-2035. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2016.07.013. — View Citation

Outcome

Type Measure Description Time frame Safety issue
Primary Sensitivity: Proportion of Patients With Positive QFR of FFR Positive Patients (True Positives) Compared to Proportion of Patients With Positive Percentual Diameter Stenosis (DS%) Assessed by 2D QCA of FFR Positive Patients (True Positives) Positive FFR is defined as FFR=0.80. Positive QFR is defined as QFR=0.80. Positive DS% is defined as DS% > 50% 1 hour
Primary Specificity: Proportion of Patients With Negative QFR of FFR Negative Patients (True Negatives) Compared to Proportion of Patients With Negative DS% Assessed by 2D QCA of FFR Negative Patients (True Negatives) Negative FFR is defined as FFR>0.80. Negative QFR is defined as QFR>0.80. Negative DS% is defined as DS% = 50%. 1 hour
Secondary Percentage of Patients With Successful QFR in Patients With Successful FFR (Feasibility) 1 hour
Secondary Proportion of Patients With Positive QFR of FFR Positive Patients (True Positives) (Sensitivity) Positive FFR is defined as FFR=0.80. Positive QFR is defined as QFR=0.80 1 hour
Secondary Proportion of Patients With Negative QFR of FFR Negative Patients (True Negatives) (Specificity) Negative FFR is defined as FFR>0.80. Negative QFR is defined as QFR>0.80 1 hour
Secondary Proportion of Patients With Positive FFR (True Positives) of Patients With Positive QFR (Positive Predictive Value) Positive FFR is defined as FFR=0.80. Positive QFR is defined as QFR=0.80 1 hour
Secondary Proportion of Patients With Negative FFR (True Negatives) of Patients With Negative QFR (Negative Predictive Value) Negative FFR is defined as FFR>0.80. Negative QFR is defined as QFR>0.80 1 hour
Secondary Diagnostic Performance of QFR in Comparison to FFR Reported as Positive and Negative Likelihood Ratio Positive likelihood ratio is defined as sensitivity/(1-specificity). Negative likelihood ratio is defined as (1-sensitivty)/specificity 1 hour
Secondary Diagnostic Grey Zone Calculation. QFR Limits for Achieving 95% Sensitivity and Specificity in Comparison to FFR QFR limits to yield 95% sensitivity and specificity. The QFR limits are identified by Area under the receiver operating curve analysis.
QFR limits are defined as the numerical QFR ratios (0-1.00).
1 hour
Secondary Diagnostic Accuracy of TIMI-flow Based QFR in Comparison to 2D QCA (>50% Diameter Stenosis) Comparison of proportion of participants correctly classified by QFR and 2D QCA using FFR as reference standard.
Diagnostic accuracy is defined as (true positives + false negatives) / (true positives+false positives+true negatives+false negatives).
Positive FFR is defined as FFR=0.80. Positive QFR is defined as QFR=0.80. Negative FFR is defines as FFR>0.80. Negative QFR is defines as QFR>0.80. Positive 2D QCA is defined as 2D-QCA % percent diameter stenosis >50. Negative 2D QCA is defined as 2D-QCA % diameter stenosis=50.
1 hour
Secondary Participants With Myocardial Infarction (Number of Patients) Peri-procedural myocardial infarction 1 day
Secondary All-cause Mortality (Number of Patients) Peri-procedural mortality 1 day
Secondary Time to FFR Time from starting preparations to do FFR (e.g. ordering assistants to prepare pressure wire, adenosine infusion etc.) to FFR value is obtained and drift has been verified to be within the prespecified limits 1 hour
Secondary Time to QFR After Receiving Angiographic Images Time from first image evaluation on QFR computer until TIMI frame count based QFR value is obtained 1 hour
Secondary Contrast Use Volume of contrast for total procedure 1 hour
Secondary Fluoroscopy Time Fluoroscopy time for total procedure 1 hour
See also
  Status Clinical Trial Phase
Recruiting NCT06030596 - SPECT Myocardial Blood Flow Quantification for Diagnosis of Ischemic Heart Disease Determined by Fraction Flow Reserve
Completed NCT04080700 - Korean Prospective Registry for Evaluating the Safety and Efficacy of Distal Radial Approach (KODRA)
Recruiting NCT03810599 - Patient-reported Outcomes in the Bergen Early Cardiac Rehabilitation Study N/A
Recruiting NCT06002932 - Comparison of PROVISIONal 1-stent Strategy With DEB Versus Planned 2-stent Strategy in Coronary Bifurcation Lesions. N/A
Not yet recruiting NCT06032572 - Evaluation of the Safety and Effectiveness of the VRS100 System in PCI (ESSENCE) N/A
Recruiting NCT05308719 - Nasal Oxygen Therapy After Cardiac Surgery N/A
Recruiting NCT04242134 - Drug-coating Balloon Angioplasties for True Coronary Bifurcation Lesions N/A
Completed NCT04556994 - Phase 1 Cardiac Rehabilitation With and Without Lower Limb Paddling Effects in Post CABG Patients. N/A
Recruiting NCT05846893 - Drug-Coated Balloon vs. Drug-Eluting Stent for Clinical Outcomes in Patients With Large Coronary Artery Disease N/A
Recruiting NCT06027788 - CTSN Embolic Protection Trial N/A
Recruiting NCT05023629 - STunning After Balloon Occlusion N/A
Completed NCT04941560 - Assessing the Association Between Multi-dimension Facial Characteristics and Coronary Artery Diseases
Completed NCT04006288 - Switching From DAPT to Dual Pathway Inhibition With Low-dose Rivaroxaban in Adjunct to Aspirin in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease Phase 4
Completed NCT01860274 - Meshed Vein Graft Patency Trial - VEST N/A
Recruiting NCT06174090 - The Effect of Video Education on Pain, Anxiety and Knowledge Levels of Coronary Bypass Graft Surgery Patients N/A
Completed NCT03968809 - Role of Cardioflux in Predicting Coronary Artery Disease (CAD) Outcomes
Terminated NCT03959072 - Cardiac Cath Lab Staff Radiation Exposure
Recruiting NCT05065073 - Iso-Osmolar vs. Low-Osmolar Contrast Agents for Optical Coherence Tomography Phase 4
Recruiting NCT04566497 - Assessment of Adverse Outcome in Asymptomatic Patients With Prior Coronary Revascularization Who Have a Systematic Stress Testing Strategy Or a Non-testing Strategy During Long-term Follow-up. N/A
Completed NCT05096442 - Compare the Safety and Efficacy of Genoss® DCB and SeQuent® Please NEO in Korean Patients With Coronary De Novo Lesions N/A