ISSN 2149-2263 | E-ISSN 2149-2271
The Anatolian Journal of Cardiology
Exploring the Predictors of the Discrepancy Between Quantitative Flow Ratio and Fractional Flow Reserve Measurements [Anatol J Cardiol]
Anatol J Cardiol. 2023; 27(7): 390-397 | DOI: 10.14744/AnatolJCardiol.2023.2622

Exploring the Predictors of the Discrepancy Between Quantitative Flow Ratio and Fractional Flow Reserve Measurements

Tianhui Dong, Li Zhou, Xuhe Gong, Longhui Ma, Yutian Bai, Hui Chen
Department of Cardiology, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China

Background: Quantitative flow ratio is a novel technology for the functional assessment of intermediate coronary stenoses. The authors sought to explore the influence of diabetes mellitus on the application of quantitative flow ratio and predictors of discrepancies between quantitative flow ratio and fractional flow reserve.

Methods: Quantitative flow ratio was calculated in 224 patients (317 vessels) who underwent fractional flow reserve measurement by professional technicians blinded to fractional flow reserve value. Patients were divided into the diabetes mellitus group and the non-diabetes mellitus group. The diagnostic performance of quantitative flow ratio was assessed using fractional flow reserve as a reference.

Results: Good correlation and agreement between quantitative flow ratio and fractional flow reserve can be found in the diabetes mellitus group (r = 0.834, P <.001; mean difference: 0.007 ± 0.108). Prior myocardial infarction showed a statistically significant association with increased classification discrepancy between quantitative flow ratio and fractional flow reserve [odds ratio 3.16 (95% confidence interval: 1.29-7.75), P =.01]. The area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve of quantitative flow ratio showed no significant difference in diabetes mellitus and non-diabetes mellitus groups, hemoglobin A1c ≥ 7% and hemoglobin A1c < 7% groups, diabetic duration ≥ 10 years and diabetic duration < 10 years groups (area under receiver-operating characteristic curve: 0.90 (95% confidence interval: 0.84-0.94) vs. 0.92 (95% confidence interval: 0.87-0.96), P =.54; 0.89 (95% confidence interval: 0.81-0.95) vs. 0.92 (95% confidence interval: 0.81-0.97), P =.65; 0.88 (95% confidence interval: 0.79-0.94) vs. 0.89 (95% confidence interval: 0.79-0.96), P =.83; respectively).

Conclusions: Clinical application of quantitative flow ratio is not limited to diabetic patients. The relationship between prior myocardial infarction and quantitative flow ratio needs to be further developed.

Keywords: Quantitative flow ratio, fractional flow reserve, diabetes mellitus, prior myocardial infarction

Tianhui Dong, Li Zhou, Xuhe Gong, Longhui Ma, Yutian Bai, Hui Chen. Exploring the Predictors of the Discrepancy Between Quantitative Flow Ratio and Fractional Flow Reserve Measurements. Anatol J Cardiol. 2023; 27(7): 390-397

Corresponding Author: Hui Chen
Manuscript Language: English


Journal Metrics

Journal Citation Indicator: 0.18
CiteScore: 1.1
Source Normalized Impact
per Paper:
0.22
SCImago Journal Rank: 0.348

Quick Search



Copyright © 2024 The Anatolian Journal of Cardiology



Kare Publishing is a subsidiary of Kare Media.