Predictive Value of Intravascular Ultrasound for the Function of Intermediate Coronary Lesions

Overview

Journal BMC Cardiovasc Disord

Publisher Biomed Central

Specialty Cardiology & Vascular Diseases

Date 2023 Sep 14

PMID 37710160

Authors

Yajuan Zhu

Guowei Zhou

Lei Yang

Keng Liu

Yuning Xie

Wen-Yi Yang

Qiuyan Dai

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) can provide detailed coronary anatomic parameters. The purpose of our study was to evaluate the parameters measured by IVUS for the prediction of intermediate coronary lesions function by referencing quantitative fraction ratio (QFR) ≤ 0.80 (vs. > 0.80).

Methods: Eighty four cases with 92 intermediate coronary lesions in vessels with a diameter ≥ 2.50 mm were enrolled. Paired assessment of IVUS and cQFR was available, and vessels with cQFR ≤ 0.8 were considered the positive reference standard. Logistic regression was used to select model variables by a maximum partial likelihood estimation test and receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) analysis to evaluate the diagnostic value of different indices.

Results: Plaque burden (PB) and lesion length (LL) of IVUS were independent risk factors for the function of coronary lesions. The predictive probability P was derived from the combined PB and LL model. The area under the curve (AUC) of PB, (minimum lumen area) MLA, and LL and the predicted probability P are 0.789,0.732,0731, and 0.863, respectively (P < 0.01). The AUC of the predicted probability P was the biggest among them; the prediction accuracy of cQFR ≤ 0.8 was 84.8%, and the sensitivity of the diagnostic model was 0.826, specificity was 0. 725, and P < 0.01.

Conclusion: PB and LL of IVUS were independent risk factors influencing the function of intermediate coronary lesions. The model combining the PB and LL may predict coronary artery function better than any other single parameter.

Citing Articles

Correction: Predictive value of intravascular ultrasound for the function of intermediate coronary lesions.

Zhu Y, Zhou G, Yang L, Liu K, Xie Y, Yang W BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2023; 23(1):528.

PMID: 37891496 PMC: 10612273. DOI: 10.1186/s12872-023-03545-9.

References

Armstrong P . A comparison of pharmacologic therapy with/without timely coronary intervention vs. primary percutaneous intervention early after ST-elevation myocardial infarction: the WEST (Which Early ST-elevation myocardial infarction Therapy) study. Eur Heart J. 2006; 27(13):1530-8. DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehl088. View

Xu B, Tu S, Song L, Jin Z, Yu B, Fu G . Angiographic quantitative flow ratio-guided coronary intervention (FAVOR III China): a multicentre, randomised, sham-controlled trial. Lancet. 2021; 398(10317):2149-2159. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)02248-0. View

Gotberg M, Cook C, Sen S, Nijjer S, Escaned J, Davies J . The Evolving Future of Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio and Fractional Flow Reserve. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017; 70(11):1379-1402. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2017.07.770. View

Lopes J, Jordan M, Bezerra H, Costa M, Attizzani G . Diagnostic accuracy of intravascular ultrasound-derived minimal lumen area compared with fractional flow reserve. Minerva Cardioangiol. 2016; 65(3):321-330. DOI: 10.23736/S0026-4725.16.04276-6. View

Westra J, Tu S, Winther S, Nissen L, Vestergaard M, Andersen B . Evaluation of Coronary Artery Stenosis by Quantitative Flow Ratio During Invasive Coronary Angiography: The WIFI II Study (Wire-Free Functional Imaging II). Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2018; 11(3):e007107. PMC: 5895131. DOI: 10.1161/CIRCIMAGING.117.007107. View

Tu S, Westra J, Yang J, von Birgelen C, Ferrara A, Pellicano M . Diagnostic Accuracy of Fast Computational Approaches to Derive Fractional Flow Reserve From Diagnostic Coronary Angiography: The International Multicenter FAVOR Pilot Study. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016; 9(19):2024-2035. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcin.2016.07.013. View

Kleczynski P, Dziewierz A, Rzeszutko L, Dudek D, Legutko J . Borderline coronary lesion assessment with quantitative flow ratio and its relation to the instantaneous wave-free ratio. Adv Med Sci. 2020; 66(1):1-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.advms.2020.10.001. View

Tonino P, De Bruyne B, Pijls N, Siebert U, Ikeno F, van t Veer M . Fractional flow reserve versus angiography for guiding percutaneous coronary intervention. N Engl J Med. 2009; 360(3):213-24. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa0807611. View

Xu B, Tu S, Qiao S, Qu X, Chen Y, Yang J . Diagnostic Accuracy of Angiography-Based Quantitative Flow Ratio Measurements for Online Assessment of Coronary Stenosis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017; 70(25):3077-3087. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2017.10.035. View

10.

Smit J, Koning G, van Rosendael A, El Mahdiui M, Mertens B, Schalij M . Referral of patients for fractional flow reserve using quantitative flow ratio. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2018; 20(11):1231-1238. DOI: 10.1093/ehjci/jey187. View

11.

Westra J, Andersen B, Campo G, Matsuo H, Koltowski L, Eftekhari A . Diagnostic Performance of In-Procedure Angiography-Derived Quantitative Flow Reserve Compared to Pressure-Derived Fractional Flow Reserve: The FAVOR II Europe-Japan Study. J Am Heart Assoc. 2018; 7(14). PMC: 6064860. DOI: 10.1161/JAHA.118.009603. View

12.

Chen S, Xu B, Chen J, Xu T, Ye F, Zhang J . Diagnostic accuracy of quantitative angiographic and intravascular ultrasound parameters predicting the functional significance of single de novo lesions. Int J Cardiol. 2013; 168(2):1364-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2012.12.010. View

13.

Hwang D, Choi K, Lee J, Mejia-Renteria H, Kim J, Park J . Diagnostic Agreement of Quantitative Flow Ratio With Fractional Flow Reserve and Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio. J Am Heart Assoc. 2019; 8(8):e011605. PMC: 6507214. DOI: 10.1161/JAHA.118.011605. View

14.

Johnson N, Toth G, Lai D, Zhu H, Acar G, Agostoni P . Prognostic value of fractional flow reserve: linking physiologic severity to clinical outcomes. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014; 64(16):1641-54. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2014.07.973. View

15.

Zuo W, Yang M, Chen Y, Xie A, Chen L, Ma G . Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Performance of Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio versus Quantitative Flow Ratio for Detecting the Functional Significance of Coronary Stenosis. Biomed Res Int. 2019; 2019:5828931. PMC: 6500690. DOI: 10.1155/2019/5828931. View

16.

Tanigaki T, Emori H, Kawase Y, Kubo T, Omori H, Shiono Y . QFR Versus FFR Derived From Computed Tomography for Functional Assessment of Coronary Artery Stenosis. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2019; 12(20):2050-2059. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcin.2019.06.043. View

17.

Cui M, Zhu D, Guo L, Song L, Zhang Y, Zhang F . Usefulness of lumen area parameters determined by intravascular ultrasound to predict functional significance of intermediate coronary artery stenosis. Chin Med J (Engl). 2013; 126(9):1606-11. View

18.

Escaned J, Berry C, De Bruyne B, Shabbir A, Collet C, Lee J . Applied coronary physiology for planning and guidance of percutaneous coronary interventions. A clinical consensus statement from the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) of the European Society of Cardiology. EuroIntervention. 2023; 19(6):464-481. PMC: 10436072. DOI: 10.4244/EIJ-D-23-00194. View

19.

Brown A, Giblett J, Bennett M, West N, Hoole S . Anatomical plaque and vessel characteristics are associated with hemodynamic indices including fractional flow reserve and coronary flow reserve: A prospective exploratory intravascular ultrasound analysis. Int J Cardiol. 2017; 248:92-96. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2017.08.036. View

20.

Stone G, Maehara A, Lansky A, De Bruyne B, Cristea E, Mintz G . A prospective natural-history study of coronary atherosclerosis. N Engl J Med. 2011; 364(3):226-35. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1002358. View