Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
: 20 | 50 | 100
1 - 1 de 1
1.
Cardiol J ; 29(3): 388-395, 2022.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35578755

BACKGROUND: The agreement between single-projection Murray-based quantitative flow ratio (mQFR) and conventional three-dimensional quantitative flow ratio (3D-QFR) has not been reported hitherto. METHODS: Patients from a multinational database were randomly selected for the study of agreement, according to sample size calculation. Both conventional 3D-QFR and mQFR were analyzed for all available arteries at a central corelab by independent analysts, blinded to each other's results. RESULTS: Ninety-eight coronary arteries from 35 patients were finally analyzed. Median 3D-QFR was 0.82 (interquartile range 0.78-0.87). The intraclass correlation coefficient for the absolute agreement between 3D-QFR and mQFR was 0.996 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.993-0.997); Lin's coefficient 0.996 (95% CI: 0.993-0.997), without constant or proportional bias (intercept = 0 and slope = 1 in orthogonal regression). As dichotomous variable, there was absolute agreement between mQFR and 3D-QFR, resulting in no single false positive or negative. Kappa index was 1 and the diagnostic accuracy 100%. CONCLUSIONS: mQFR using a single angiographic projection showed almost perfect agreement with standard 3D-QFR. These results encourage the interchangeable use of mQFR and 3D-QFR, which can be interesting to improve QFR feasibility in retrospective studies, wherein appropriate double angiographic projections might be challenging to obtain.


Coronary Artery Disease , Coronary Stenosis , Fractional Flow Reserve, Myocardial , Constriction, Pathologic , Coronary Angiography/methods , Coronary Stenosis/diagnostic imaging , Coronary Vessels/diagnostic imaging , Humans , Predictive Value of Tests , Retrospective Studies , Severity of Illness Index
...