Diagnostic Accuracy of Quantitative Flow Ratio

Coronary Artery Disease Clinical Trial

Official title:

Diagnostic Accuracy of Quantitative Flow Ratio for Hemodynamic Assessment of Coronary Artery Stenosis: Prospective Observational Study

Clinical Trial Details — Status: Completed

Administrative data

• NCT number: NCT06305572
• Other study ID #: H-1903-013-1014
• Status: Completed
• Start date: July 30, 2019
• Est. completion date: September 26, 2023

Study information

• Verified date: March 2024
• Source: Seoul National University Hospital
• Contact: n/a
• Is FDA regulated: No
• Study type: Observational [Patient Registry]

Clinical Trial Summary

The aim of this study was to investigate the accuracy of quantitative flow ratio (QFR) for predicting fractional flow reserve (FFR) ≤0.80 in an independent core laboratory.

Description:

FFR is an invasive physiological index used to define coronary stenosis that causes ischemia. Several studies have suggested that FFR-based percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) can reduce adverse clinical outcomes compared to angiography-guided PCI. Although FFR is highly recommended in current guidelines, it is underused in real-world practice. QFR is a method for evaluating fractional flow reserve FFR without the use of an invasive coronary pressure wire or pharmacological hyperemic agent. The aims of this study were: 1. To investigate diagnostic accuracy of angiography-based QFR for hemodynamic assessment of coronary artery stenosis compared to pressure wire-based FFR. 2. To compare the diagnostic performance of QFR versus % diameter stenosis (DS) in identifying physiologically significant coronary artery disease (CAD) using FFR as the reference standard. 3. To identify factors affecting QFR accuracy. 4. To compare the coronary CT data with QFR.

Recruitment information / eligibility

• Status: Completed
• Enrollment: 280
• Est. completion date: September 26, 2023
• Est. primary completion date: March 25, 2023
• Accepts healthy volunteers: No
• Gender: All
• Age group: 19 Years and older

Eligibility

Inclusion Criteria:

• Patients suspected with CAD undergoing diagnostic coronary angiography with an indication for to perform invasive FFR

Exclusion Criteria:

• Suboptimal angiographic image quality for QFR analysis
• Primary myocardial or valvular disease
• Left ventricular ejection fraction =40%
• Patients with cardiogenic shock

Related Conditions & MeSH terms

• Coronary Artery Disease

Intervention

Diagnostic Test:
• QFR
Patients suspected with CAD undergoing diagnostic coronary angiography with an indication for to perform invasive FFR were included. QFR was analyzed in an independent core laboratory (Uijeongbu Eulji Medical Center) using the software package QAngio XA 3D 2.1 (Medis Medical Imaging Systems, Leiden, the Netherlands).

Locations

Country	Name	City	State
Korea, Republic of	Seoul National University Hospital	Seoul

Sponsors (9)

Lead Sponsor	Collaborator
Seoul National University Hospital	Bucheon Sejong Hospital, Chosun University Hospital, Inje University Ilsan Paik Hospital, Keimyung University Dongsan Medical Center, Severance Hospital, Uijeongbu Eulji Medical Center, Ulsan Medical Center, Ulsan University Hospital

Country where clinical trial is conducted

Korea, Republic of, 

References & Publications (11)

Fearon WF, Achenbach S, Engstrom T, Assali A, Shlofmitz R, Jeremias A, Fournier S, Kirtane AJ, Kornowski R, Greenberg G, Jubeh R, Kolansky DM, McAndrew T, Dressler O, Maehara A, Matsumura M, Leon MB, De Bruyne B; FAST-FFR Study Investigators. Accuracy of Fractional Flow Reserve Derived From Coronary Angiography. Circulation. 2019 Jan 22;139(4):477-484. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.118.037350. — View Citation

Gotberg M, Cook CM, Sen S, Nijjer S, Escaned J, Davies JE. The Evolving Future of Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio and Fractional Flow Reserve. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017 Sep 12;70(11):1379-1402. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2017.07.770. — View Citation

Masdjedi K, van Zandvoort LJC, Balbi MM, Gijsen FJH, Ligthart JMR, Rutten MCM, Lemmert ME, Wilschut JM, Diletti R, de Jaegere P, Zijlstra F, Van Mieghem NM, Daemen J. Validation of a three-dimensional quantitative coronary angiography-based software to calculate fractional flow reserve: the FAST study. EuroIntervention. 2020 Sep 18;16(7):591-599. doi: 10.4244/EIJ-D-19-00466. — View Citation

Neumann FJ, Sousa-Uva M, Ahlsson A, Alfonso F, Banning AP, Benedetto U, Byrne RA, Collet JP, Falk V, Head SJ, Juni P, Kastrati A, Koller A, Kristensen SD, Niebauer J, Richter DJ, Seferovic PM, Sibbing D, Stefanini GG, Windecker S, Yadav R, Zembala MO; ESC Scientific Document Group. 2018 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization. Eur Heart J. 2019 Jan 7;40(2):87-165. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehy394. No abstract available. Erratum In: Eur Heart J. 2019 Oct 1;40(37):3096. — View Citation

Pijls NH, Fearon WF, Tonino PA, Siebert U, Ikeno F, Bornschein B, van't Veer M, Klauss V, Manoharan G, Engstrom T, Oldroyd KG, Ver Lee PN, MacCarthy PA, De Bruyne B; FAME Study Investigators. Fractional flow reserve versus angiography for guiding percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease: 2-year follow-up of the FAME (Fractional Flow Reserve Versus Angiography for Multivessel Evaluation) study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010 Jul 13;56(3):177-84. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2010.04.012. Epub 2010 May 28. — View Citation

Tonino PA, De Bruyne B, Pijls NH, Siebert U, Ikeno F, van' t Veer M, Klauss V, Manoharan G, Engstrom T, Oldroyd KG, Ver Lee PN, MacCarthy PA, Fearon WF; FAME Study Investigators. Fractional flow reserve versus angiography for guiding percutaneous coronary intervention. N Engl J Med. 2009 Jan 15;360(3):213-24. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0807611. — View Citation

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 JHC, 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

van Nunen LX, Zimmermann FM, Tonino PA, Barbato E, Baumbach A, Engstrom T, Klauss V, MacCarthy PA, Manoharan G, Oldroyd KG, Ver Lee PN, Van't Veer M, Fearon WF, De Bruyne B, Pijls NH; FAME Study Investigators. Fractional flow reserve versus angiography for guidance of PCI in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (FAME): 5-year follow-up of a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2015 Nov 7;386(10006):1853-60. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)00057-4. Epub 2015 Aug 30. — View Citation

Westra J, Andersen BK, Campo G, Matsuo H, Koltowski L, Eftekhari A, Liu T, Di Serafino L, Di Girolamo D, Escaned J, Nef H, Naber C, Barbierato M, Tu S, Neghabat O, Madsen M, Tebaldi M, Tanigaki T, Kochman J, Somi S, Esposito G, Mercone G, Mejia-Renteria H, Ronco F, Botker HE, Wijns W, Christiansen EH, Holm NR. Diagnostic Performance of In-Procedure Angiography-Derived Quantitative Flow Reserve Compared to Pressure-Derived Fractional Flow Reserve: The FAVOR II Europe-Japan Study. J Am Heart Assoc. 2018 Jul 6;7(14):e009603. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.118.009603. — View Citation

Xu B, Tu S, Qiao S, Qu X, Chen Y, Yang J, Guo L, Sun Z, Li Z, Tian F, Fang W, Chen J, Li W, Guan C, Holm NR, Wijns W, Hu S. Diagnostic Accuracy of Angiography-Based Quantitative Flow Ratio Measurements for Online Assessment of Coronary Stenosis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017 Dec 26;70(25):3077-3087. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2017.10.035. Epub 2017 Oct 31. — View Citation

Xu B, Tu S, Song L, Jin Z, Yu B, Fu G, Zhou Y, Wang J, Chen Y, Pu J, Chen L, Qu X, Yang J, Liu X, Guo L, Shen C, Zhang Y, Zhang Q, Pan H, Fu X, Liu J, Zhao Y, Escaned J, Wang Y, Fearon WF, Dou K, Kirtane AJ, Wu Y, Serruys PW, Yang W, Wijns W, Guan C, Leon MB, Qiao S, Stone GW; FAVOR III China study group. Angiographic quantitative flow ratio-guided coronary intervention (FAVOR III China): a multicentre, randomised, sham-controlled trial. Lancet. 2021 Dec 11;398(10317):2149-2159. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)02248-0. Epub 2021 Nov 4. — View Citation

* Note: There are 11 references in all — Click here to view all references

Outcome

Type	Measure	Description	Time frame	Safety issue
Primary	Diagnostic accuracy of QFR	Diagnostic accuracy of QFR (=0.80 or >0.80) to determine hemodynamically significant coronary stenosis using invasive FFR (=0.80 or >0.80) as a reference standard	through study completion, an average of 1 year
Secondary	Sensitivity of QFR	Sensitivity of contrast QFR to predict FFR lower than 0.8	through study completion, an average of 1 year
Secondary	Specificity of QFR	Specificity of contrast QFR to predict FFR lower than 0.8	through study completion, an average of 1 year
Secondary	Correlation	Correlation between QFR and FFR	through study completion, an average of 1 year