Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35122581›Full record

ArticleThe international journal of cardiovascular imaging2022

Diagnostic agreement of quantitative flow ratio with fractional flow reserve in a Latin-American population.

Mauro Echavarría-Pinto, Tim P Van de Hoef, Nancy Pacheco-Beltran, Jesus Eduardo Reyes-Carrera, Eduardo Rangel-Alvarado, Elizabeth Ledezma-Ledezma, Laura Alicia Aguilar-Castillo, Andrea Itzel Tovar-Becerra, Juan Ernesto Muñoz Arellano, María Neftalí Maqueda Ramírez and 7 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The international journal of cardiovascular imaging, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Left atrial remodelling,  and image-based coronary physiology.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2022
    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

17 authors.

Mauro Echavarría-PintoHospital General ISSSTE, Santiago de Querétaro, México. mauroep@hotmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7742-7094
Tim P Van de HoefAmsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Nancy Pacheco-BeltranHospital General ISSSTE, Santiago de Querétaro, México.
Jesus Eduardo Reyes-CarreraHospital General ISSSTE, Santiago de Querétaro, México.
Eduardo Rangel-AlvaradoHospital General ISSSTE, Santiago de Querétaro, México.
Elizabeth Ledezma-LedezmaHospital General ISSSTE, Santiago de Querétaro, México.
Laura Alicia Aguilar-CastilloHospital General ISSSTE, Santiago de Querétaro, México.
Andrea Itzel Tovar-BecerraHospital General ISSSTE, Santiago de Querétaro, México.
Juan Ernesto Muñoz ArellanoHospital General ISSSTE, Santiago de Querétaro, México.
María Neftalí Maqueda RamírezHospital General ISSSTE, Santiago de Querétaro, México.
Miriam MuruagaHospital General ISSSTE, Santiago de Querétaro, México.
Ana Maria Ibarra-RangelHospital General ISSSTE, Santiago de Querétaro, México.
Carlos Alberto Montes-CollantesHospital General ISSSTE, Santiago de Querétaro, México.
Jorge Luis Castrejon-MoraHospital General ISSSTE, Santiago de Querétaro, México.
Irma Hualtal Chong-BenitezHospital General ISSSTE, Santiago de Querétaro, México.
Luis Homero Vargas-TorrrescanoHospital General ISSSTE, Santiago de Querétaro, México.
Hector M García-GarcíaAutonomous University of Querétaro, Santiago de Querétaro, México.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) is a recently proposed angiographic index that allows to assess the pressure loss in coronary arteries in a similar fashion as the fractional flow reserve (FFR). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of QFR as compared to FFR, in a Latin-American population of patients with suspected ischaemic heart disease. QFR was retrospectively derived from coronary angiograms. The association, diagnostic performance, and continuous agreement of fixed-flow QFR (fQFR) and contrast-flow QFR (cQFR) with FFR was assessed by continuous and dichotomous methods. 90 vessels form 66 patients were finally included. The study comprised coronary stenoses of intermediate severity, both angiographically (diameter stenosis: 46.6 ± 12.8%) and physiologically [median FFR = 0.83 (quartile 1-3, 0.76-0.89)]. The correlation of FFR with both fQFR [ρ = 0.841, (95% CI 0.767 to 0.893), p < 0.001] and cQFR [ρ = 0.833, (95% CI 0.755 to 0.887), p < 0.001] was strong. The diagnostic performance of cQFR was good [area under the ROC curve of 0.92 (95% CI 0.86 to 0.97, p < 0.001)], with 0.80 as the optimal cQFR cut-off against FFR ≤ 0.80. This 0.80 cQFR cut-off classified correctly 83.3% of total stenoses, with a sensitivity of 85.2% and specificity of 80.6%. QFR was strongly associated with FFR and exhibited a high diagnostic performance in this Latin-American population.

Indexed as

Fractional flow reserveIschaemic heart diseasePercutaneous coronary interventionQuantitative flow ratio

Identifiers

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.