The diagnostic performance of quantitative flow ratio and perfusion imaging in patients with prior coronary artery disease
Authors' conclusion
QFR correlated better with FFR in patients with prior CAD than MPI, as reflected in the higher diagnostic performance measures for detecting FFR-defined, vessel-specific, significant CAD.
Study context
- Population
- Chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) patients with prior coronary artery disease (CAD) (previous percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and/or myocardial infarction (MI))Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) successful in 334 vessels, 166 patients
- Participants
- 189 patients
- Comparison
- QFR vs single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), positron emission tomography (PET) and CMR
- Outcome
- Diagnostic performance for fractional flow reserve (FFR)-defined (FFR ≤0.80) vessel-specific significant CAD
Methodological detailsPACIFIC-2 sub-study
- PACIFIC-2 sub-study
Performance
As reported in the abstract
Per-vessel diagnostic performance vs FFR
| Test or model | AUC | Sensitivity | Specificity | Accuracy |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| QFR | 0.89 | 72% | 87% | 84% |
| SPECT | 0.57 | 46% | 71% | 66% |
| PET | 0.66 | 58% | 67% | 65% |
| CMR | 0.60 | 33% | 83% | 72% |
AUC
QFR0.89
SPECT0.57
PET0.66
CMR0.60
Sensitivity
QFR72%
SPECT46%
PET58%
CMR33%
Specificity
QFR87%
SPECT71%
PET67%
CMR83%
Accuracy
QFR84%
SPECT66%
PET65%
CMR72%
- QFR vs SPECT: P < 0.001
- QFR vs PET: P < 0.001
- QFR vs CMR: P < 0.001
- QFR vs SPECT: P = 0.001
- QFR vs PET: P = 0.032
- QFR vs CMR: P < 0.001
- QFR vs SPECT: P < 0.001
- QFR vs PET: P < 0.001
- QFR vs CMR: P = 0.123 — similar
- QFR vs SPECT: P < 0.001
- QFR vs PET: P < 0.001
- QFR vs CMR: P < 0.001
Original publication
The diagnostic performance of quantitative flow ratio and perfusion imaging in patients with prior coronary artery disease. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. Published 14 August 2023. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →