Observational studyThe international journal of cardiovascular imaging2021
Diagnostic accuracy of quantitative flow ratio (QFR) and vessel fractional flow reserve (vFFR) estimated retrospectively by conventional radiation saving X-ray angiography.
Observational study in The international journal of cardiovascular imaging, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Comparison of Coronary Angiographic-Derived and Intracoronary Imaging-Based Fractional Flow Reserve in Assessing Coronary Artery Stenosis Severity: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.Journal of evidence-based medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Quantitative Flow Ratio-Guided vs. Angiography-Guided Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of One-Year Clinical Outcomes.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Standardized angiographic projections allow evaluation of coronary artery side branches with quantitative flow ratio (QFR).International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature · 2024Article
- Current status and future perspectives of fractional flow reserve derived from invasive coronary angiography.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Review
- Post-procedural and long-term functional outcomes of jailed side branches in stented coronary bifurcation lesions assessed with side branch Murray law-based quantitative flow ratio.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Article
- The Differences of Quantitative Flow Ratio in Coronary Artery Stenosis with or without Atrial Fibrillation.Journal of interventional cardiology · 2023Article
- Angiography-Based Fractional Flow Reserve: State of the Art.Current cardiology reports · 2022Review
- Diagnostic Accuracy of Coronary Angiography-Based Vessel Fractional Flow Reserve (vFFR) Virtual Stenting.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Imaging: New Frontiers in Vascular Training.Methodist DeBakey cardiovascular journal · 2022Review
- Functional assessment of coronary stenosis: alternative hyperemic, nonhyperemic, and angiographic indexes.REC, interventional cardiologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAngiography derived FFR reveals good performance in assessing intermediate coronary stenosis. However, its performance under contemporary low X-ray frame and pulse rate settings is unknown. We aim to validate the feasibility and performance of quantitative flow ratio (QFR) and vessel fractional flow reserve (vFFR) under such angiograms.
methodsThis was an observational, retrospective, single center cohort study. 134 vessels in 102 patients, with angiograms acquired under 7.5fps and 7pps mode, were enrolled. QFR (fQFR and cQFR) and vFFR were validated with FFR as the gold standard. A conventional manual and a newly developed algorithmic exclusion method (M and A group) were both evaluated for identification of poor-quality angiograms.
resultsGood agreement between QFR/vFFR and FFR were observed in both M and A group, except for vFFR in the M group. The correlation coefficients between fQFR/cQFR/vFFR and FFR were 0.6242, 0.5888, 0.4089 in the M group, with r
conclusionsQFR/vFFR assessment is feasible under 7.5fps and 7pps angiography, where cQFR showed no advantage compared to fQFR. Our newly developed algorithmic exclusion method could be a better method of selecting angiograms with adequate quality for angiography derived FFR assessment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.