Comparison of quantitative flow ratio (QFR) and instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) or resting full-cycle ratio (RFR) during daily routine in the catheterization laboratory

Abstract Background The prognosis of patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) depends strongly on the hemodynamic relevance stenosis. gold standard is invasive evaluation stenosis using Fractional Flow Reserve (FFR), instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) or Resting Full-Cycle Ratio (RFR). use procedures remains low due to procedural factors and costs. Quantitative (QFR) a novel, software-based method evaluate physiology lesions during cardiac catheterization. Computing three-dimensional model vessel based two angiographic recordings analyzing fluid dynamics contrast medium flow, software computes FFR. In setting clinical studies, it has been demonstrated that QFR feasible correlates well aim this study compare feasibility reliability established measurements iFR RFR in daily routine. Methods Patients an indication for angiography 30 90% were simultaneously assessed iFR/RFR routine setting. QFR-computation was performed online by certified expert QAngio XA 3D 3.2. following outcome parameters analyzed: time result, volume applicated medium, dose area product, result evaluation. results have registered both methods, respectively. Results 102 arteries analyzed RFR. shows good correlation (r=0.753, AUC=0.922) accuracy (agreement 89.22%, sensitivity 95.83%, specificity 83.33%, PPV 83.64%, NPV 95.74%). data show delivers significantly faster reduces procedure related radiation from median 598.8 cGy cm2 306.75 cG ycm2 (p<0.001). no significant difference regarding amount used. Conclusion diagnostic agreement can reduce length dose. Thereby could increase physiologically guided interventions Funding Acknowledgement Type funding sources: None.