Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions · 2026
VERMONT μQFR: Diagnostic Accuracy of Murray Law-Based 2D-μQFR Compared to 3D-μQFR and vFFR.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Akrawi Daniel, Kadappu Krishna, Xu James, Badie Tamer Yousef Naguib, Gibbs Oliver, Kachwalla Hashim, Nguyen Phong T D, Kurup Rahul, Premawardhana Upul, Huang Justyn, Tran Hao, Soosapilla Kavie, Basilakis Jim, O'loughlin Aiden, Hennessy Annemarie, Femia Giuseppe, Lo Sidney
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Murray law-based quantitative flow ratio (μQFR) is an angiography-derived physiological index that utilizes a single angiographic projection with artificial intelligence-guided vessel segmentation.
AIMS: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy and time efficacy of 2D-μQFR against wire-based fractional flow reserve (FFR ≤ 0.80), compare its performance with 3D-μQFR and vessel-FFR (vFFR), and assess feasibility in lesions excluded from vFFR analysis.
METHODS: This sub-study of the prospective VERMONT trial analyzed 2D- and 3D-μQFR retrospectively using prospectively acquired angiograms, with wire-based FFR as the reference standard.
RESULTS: Among 209 patients with 225 intermediate lesions, 205 lesions were analyzed. 2D-μQFR demonstrated excellent diagnostic accuracy for FFR ≤ 0.80 (AUC 0.95; 95% CI 0.93-0.98), with 93% sensitivity, 92% specificity, 88% positive predictive value (PPV), and 95% negative predictive value (NPV). Inter-observer agreement was excellent (r = 0.94, p < 0.001), and 2D-μQFR analysis was 15.1 min faster than wire-based FFR (1.8 ± 0.7 vs. 16.9 ± 5.4 min, p < 0.001). Diagnostic performance was comparable to that of 3D-μQFR, which achieved an AUC of 0.94 (95% CI 0.91-0.97), with 89% sensitivity, 90% specificity, 86% PPV, and 93% NPV. It was more specific than vFFR, which achieved an AUC of 0.92 (95% CI 0.89-0.96), with 90% sensitivity, 79% specificity, 74% PPV, and 93% NPV. Single-projection analysis was feasible in 85% of lesions excluded from vFFR due to image quality limitations.
CONCLUSION: Single-projection 2D-μQFR provides accurate, rapid, and reproducible physiological assessment comparable to 3D-μQFR with superior specificity to vFFR. These findings support 2D-μQFR as a practical, wire-free alternative to invasive FFR in routine clinical practice.
AIMS: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy and time efficacy of 2D-μQFR against wire-based fractional flow reserve (FFR ≤ 0.80), compare its performance with 3D-μQFR and vessel-FFR (vFFR), and assess feasibility in lesions excluded from vFFR analysis.
METHODS: This sub-study of the prospective VERMONT trial analyzed 2D- and 3D-μQFR retrospectively using prospectively acquired angiograms, with wire-based FFR as the reference standard.
RESULTS: Among 209 patients with 225 intermediate lesions, 205 lesions were analyzed. 2D-μQFR demonstrated excellent diagnostic accuracy for FFR ≤ 0.80 (AUC 0.95; 95% CI 0.93-0.98), with 93% sensitivity, 92% specificity, 88% positive predictive value (PPV), and 95% negative predictive value (NPV). Inter-observer agreement was excellent (r = 0.94, p < 0.001), and 2D-μQFR analysis was 15.1 min faster than wire-based FFR (1.8 ± 0.7 vs. 16.9 ± 5.4 min, p < 0.001). Diagnostic performance was comparable to that of 3D-μQFR, which achieved an AUC of 0.94 (95% CI 0.91-0.97), with 89% sensitivity, 90% specificity, 86% PPV, and 93% NPV. It was more specific than vFFR, which achieved an AUC of 0.92 (95% CI 0.89-0.96), with 90% sensitivity, 79% specificity, 74% PPV, and 93% NPV. Single-projection analysis was feasible in 85% of lesions excluded from vFFR due to image quality limitations.
CONCLUSION: Single-projection 2D-μQFR provides accurate, rapid, and reproducible physiological assessment comparable to 3D-μQFR with superior specificity to vFFR. These findings support 2D-μQFR as a practical, wire-free alternative to invasive FFR in routine clinical practice.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
HumansFractional Flow Reserve, MyocardialPredictive Value of TestsFemaleReproducibility of ResultsProspective StudiesImaging, Three-DimensionalFeasibility StudiesCoronary AngiographyMaleRetrospective StudiesAgedMiddle AgedRadiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-AssistedCoronary VesselsCardiac CatheterizationCoronary Artery DiseaseTime Factors