Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32152810›Full record

ArticleThe international journal of cardiovascular imaging2020

Predictive value of the QFR in detecting vulnerable plaques in non-flow limiting lesions: a combined analysis of the PROSPECT and IBIS-4 study.

Hannah Safi, Christos V Bourantas, Anantharaman Ramasamy, Thomas Zanchin, Sarah Bär, Vincenzo Tufaro, Chongying Jin, Ryo Torii, Alexios Karagiannis, Johan H C Reiber and 10 more

Open access · greenAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The international journal of cardiovascular imaging, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 21% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Functional or anatomical assessment of non-culprit lesions in acute myocardial infarction.EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

20 authors at 13 institutions in 5 countries.

Hannah SafiDepartment of Cardiology, Barts Heart Centre, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK.
Christos V BourantasDepartment of Cardiology, Barts Heart Centre, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK. cbourantas@gmail.com.
Anantharaman RamasamyDepartment of Cardiology, Barts Heart Centre, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK.
Thomas ZanchinDepartment of Cardiology, Barts Heart Centre, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK.
Sarah BärDepartment of Cardiology, Bern University Hospital, Bern, Switzerland.
Vincenzo TufaroDepartment of Cardiology, Barts Heart Centre, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK.
Chongying JinDepartment of Cardiology, Barts Heart Centre, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK.
Ryo ToriiDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, University College London, London, UK.
Alexios KaragiannisCTU Bern, Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine, Bern University, Bern, Switzerland.
Johan H C ReiberMedis Medical Imaging Systems bv, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Anthony MathurDepartment of Cardiology, Barts Heart Centre, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK.
Yoshinubo OnumaDepartment of Interventional Cardiology, Thoraxcenter, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Stephan WindeckerDepartment of Cardiology, Bern University Hospital, Bern, Switzerland.
Alexandra LanskyInstitute of Cardiovascular Sciences, University College London, London, UK.
Akiko MaeharaDepartment of Cardiology, Columbia University Medical Center and the Cardiovascular Research Foundation, New York, NY, USA.
Patrick W SerruysFaculty of Medicine, National Heart & Lung Institute, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Peter StoneCardiovascular Division, Brigham & Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Andreas BaumbachDepartment of Cardiology, Barts Heart Centre, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK.
Gregg W StoneDepartment of Cardiology, Columbia University Medical Center and the Cardiovascular Research Foundation, New York, NY, USA.
Lorenz RäberDepartment of Cardiology, Bern University Hospital, Bern, Switzerland.
Barts Health NHS Trust · GBUniversity Hospital of Bern · CHUniversity College London · GBBrigham and Women's Hospital · USCardiovascular Research Foundation · USCentre for Medical Systems Biology · NLColumbia University Irving Medical Center · USErasmus University Rotterdam · NLImperial College London · GBSir Run Run Shaw Hospital · CNUniversity of Bern · CHWilliam Harvey Research Institute · GBYale University · US

Funding

British Heart Foundation PG/17/18/32883
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Studies have shown that the quantitative flow ratio (QFR), recently introduced to assess lesion severity from coronary angiography, provides useful prognostic information; however the additive value of this technique over intravascular imaging in detecting lesions that are likely to cause events is yet unclear. We analysed data acquired in the PROSPECT and IBIS-4 studies, in particular the baseline virtual histology-intravascular ultrasound (VH-IVUS) and angiographic data from 17 non-culprit lesions with a presumable vulnerable phenotype (i.e., thin or thick cap fibroatheroma) that caused major adverse cardiac events or required revascularization (MACE) at 5-year follow-up and from a group of 78 vulnerable plaques that remained quiescent. The segments studied by VH-IVUS were identified in coronary angiography and the QFR was estimated. The additive value of 3-dimensional quantitative coronary angiography (3D-QCA) and of the QFR in predicting MACE at 5 year follow-up beyond plaque characteristics was examined. It was found that MACE lesions had a greater plaque burden (PB) and smaller minimum lumen area (MLA) on VH-IVUS, a longer length and a smaller minimum lumen diameter (MLD) on 3D-QCA and a lower QFR compared with lesions that remained quiescent. By univariate analysis MLA, PB, MLD, lesion length on 3D-QCA and QFR were predictors of MACE. In multivariate analysis a low but normal QFR (> 0.80 to < 0.97) was the only independent prediction of MACE (HR 3.53, 95% CI 1.16-10.75; P = 0.027). In non-flow limiting lesions with a vulnerable phenotype, QFR may provide additional prognostic information beyond plaque morphology for predicting MACE throughout 5 years.

Indexed as

Coronary AngiographyCoronary CirculationPlaque, AtheroscleroticUltrasonography, InterventionalAgedCoronary Artery DiseaseCoronary VesselsDisease ProgressionFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPredictive Value of TestsPrognosisRadiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-AssistedRetrospective StudiesQFRQuantitative coronary angiographyVulnerable plaque

Identifiers

PMID32152810
OpenAlexW3010499751

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.