Discordance Between Resting and Hyperemic Indices of Coronary Stenosis Severity The VERIFY 2 Study (A Comparative Study of Resting Coronary Pressure Gradient, Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio and Fractional Flow Reserve in an Unselected Population Referred for Invasive Angiography)
Discordance Between Resting and Hyperemic Indices of Coronary Stenosis Severity The VERIFY 2 Study (A Comparative Study of Resting Coronary Pressure Gradient, Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio and Fractional Flow Reserve in an Unselected Population Referred for Invasive Angiography)
复制标题
DOI：
10.1161/circinterventions.116.004016
复制
发表时间：
2016-11-01
影响因子：
5.6
通讯作者：
Watkins, Stuart
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Hennigan, Barry;Oldroyd, Keith G.;Watkins, Stuart
背景：冠状动脉远端压力比（Pd/Pa）和瞬时无波比（iFR）是在无充血情况下测量冠状动脉狭窄的功能指标。有研究表明，与分数血流储备（FFR）相比，iFR对Pd/Pa的诊断准确性更高。我们假设，与FFR相比，基于iFR和Pd/Pa的二元截止值或结合iFR或Pd/Pa的混合策略的血运重建决策将导致类似程度的分歧。方法和结果：这是一项前瞻性研究，使用专有软件计算iFR，在连续的临床适应症患者中进行FFR。我们测量了Pd/Pa、iFR、FFR和充血iFR。诊断准确性与FFR
Background-Distal coronary to aortic pressure ratio (Pd/Pa) and instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) are indices of functional significance of a coronary stenosis measured without hyperemia. It has been suggested that iFR has superior diagnostic accuracy to Pd/Pa when compared with fractional flow reserve (FFR). We hypothesized that in comparison with FFR, revascularization decisions based on either binary cutoff values for iFR and Pd/Pa or hybrid strategies incorporating iFR or Pd/Pa will result in similar levels of disagreement.Methods and Results-This is a prospective study in consecutive patients undergoing FFR for clinical indications using proprietary software to calculate iFR. We measured Pd/Pa, iFR, FFR, and hyperemic iFR. Diagnostic accuracy versus FFR