Anonymous Comparison of Various Angiography-Derived Fractional Flow Reserve Software With Pressure-Derived Physiological Assessment
Authors' conclusion
This head-to-head comparison by an independent core lab demonstrated that the diagnostic accuracy of various angio-FFR software for predicting PW-FFR ≤0.80 was useful, with a higher discrimination compared with 2-dimensional QCA %DS; however, it did not reach the diagnostic accuracy previously reported in validation studies of various vendors.
Study context
- Population
- Vessels with documented sites of pressure wire-derived FFR and instantaneous wave-free ratio
- Participants
- 390 vessels
- Comparison
- 5 angio-FFR software/methods vs 2-dimensional quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) %DS, against PW-FFR
- Outcome
- AUC for predicting FFR ≤0.8
Methodological detailsprospective cohort, independent core lab, blinded analysts, anonymized results
- Prospective cohort
- Independent core lab
- Blinded analysts
- Anonymized results
Performance
As reported in the abstract
| Test or model | AUC |
|---|---|
| A | 0.75 |
| B | 0.74 |
| C | 0.74 |
| D | 0.73 |
| E | 0.73 |
| 2D QCA %DS | 0.65 |
AUC
A0.75
B0.74
C0.74
D0.73
E0.73
2D QCA %DS0.65
Further findings
| Outcome | Values |
|---|---|
| Analyzable vessels | A 100% · B 100% · C 92.1% · D 99.5% · E 92.1% |
Original publication
Anonymous Comparison of Various Angiography-Derived Fractional Flow Reserve Software With Pressure-Derived Physiological Assessment. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. Published 16 May 2023. doi:10.
Summarised from the published abstract; every number is checked against it