Diagnostic Accuracy of Computed Tomography–Derived Fractional Flow Reserve: A Systematic Review

Importance Computed tomography–derived fractional flow reserve (FFR-CT) is a novel, noninvasive test for myocardial ischemia. Clinicians using FFR-CT must be able to interpret individual FFR-CT results to determine subsequent patient care. Objective To provide clinicians a means of interpreting individual FFR-CT results with respect to the range of invasive FFRs that this interpretation might likely represent. Evidence Review We performed a systematic review in accordance with guidelines from the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. A systematic search of MEDLINE (January 1, 2011, to 2016, week 2) and EMBASE (January 1, 2011, to 2016, week 2) was performed for studies assessing the diagnostic accuracy of FFR-CT. Title words used were computed tomography or computed tomographic and fractional flow reserve or FFR. Results were limited to publications in peer-reviewed journals. Duplicate studies and abstracts from scientific meetings were removed. All of the retrieved studies, including references, were reviewed. Findings There were 908 vessels from 536 patients in 5 studies included in the analysis. A total of 365 (68.1%) were male, and the mean (SD) age was 63.2 (9.5) years. The overall per-vessel diagnostic accuracy of FFR-CT was 81.9% (95% CI, 79.4%-84.4%). For vessels with FFR-CT values below 0.60, 0.60 to 0.70, 0.70 to 0.80, 0.80 to 0.90, and above 0.90, diagnostic accuracy of FFR-CT was 86.4% (95% CI, 78.0%-94.0%), 74.7% (95% CI, 71.9%-77.5%), 46.1% (95% CI, 42.9%-49.3%), 87.3% (95% CI, 85.1%-89.5%), and 97.9% (95% CI, 97.9%-98.8%), respectively. The 82% (overall) diagnostic accuracy threshold was met for FFR-CT values lower than 0.63 or above 0.83. More stringent 95% and 98% diagnostic accuracy thresholds were met for FFR-CT values lower than 0.53 or above 0.93 and lower than 0.47 or above 0.99, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance The diagnostic accuracy of FFR-CT varies markedly across the spectrum of disease. This analysis allows clinicians to interpret the diagnostic accuracy of individual FFR-CT results. In combination with patient-specific factors, clinicians can use FFR-CT to judge when the cost and risk of an invasive angiogram may safely be avoided.

[1]  Patricia V. Lawford,et al.  “ Virtual ” (Computed) Fractional Flow Reserve Current Challenges and Limitations , 2017 .

[2]  A. Hughes,et al.  Classification performance of instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) and fractional flow reserve in a clinical population of intermediate coronary stenoses: results of the ADVISE registry. , 2013, EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology.

[3]  D. Moher,et al.  Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. , 2009, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[4]  Matthias Gutberlet,et al.  Clinical outcomes of fractional flow reserve by computed tomographic angiography-guided diagnostic strategies vs. usual care in patients with suspected coronary artery disease: the prospective longitudinal trial of FFRCT: outcome and resource impacts study , 2015, European heart journal.

[5]  Susan Mallett,et al.  Circulating MicroRNAs as a Novel Class of Diagnostic Biomarkers in Gastrointestinal Tumors Detection: A Meta-Analysis Based on 42 Articles , 2014, PloS one.

[6]  Nikola Jagic,et al.  Fractional flow reserve-guided PCI versus medical therapy in stable coronary disease. , 2012, The New England journal of medicine.

[7]  Michael J Pencina,et al.  Diagnostic accuracy of fractional flow reserve from anatomic CT angiography. , 2012, JAMA.

[8]  Charles A. Taylor,et al.  Patient-Specific Modeling of Blood Flow and Pressure in Human Coronary Arteries , 2010, Annals of Biomedical Engineering.

[9]  Sankey V. Williams,et al.  2012 ACCF/AHA/ACP/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS Guideline for the diagnosis and management of patients with stable ischemic heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines, and the American College of Physicians, American Ass , 2012, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[10]  Hiroshi Ito,et al.  Diagnostic performance of noninvasive fractional flow reserve derived from coronary computed tomography angiography in suspected coronary artery disease: the NXT trial (Analysis of Coronary Blood Flow Using CT Angiography: Next Steps). , 2014, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[11]  Erin M Wright,et al.  The game changer. , 2018, Nursing standard (Royal College of Nursing (Great Britain) : 1987).

[12]  Helmut Baumgartner,et al.  2014 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization: the Task Force on Myocardial Revascularization of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS). Developed with the special contribution of the European Association of Percutaneous , 2014, European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery.

[13]  Charles A. Taylor,et al.  Computational fluid dynamics applied to cardiac computed tomography for noninvasive quantification of fractional flow reserve: scientific basis. , 2013, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[14]  Nikola Jagic,et al.  Fractional flow reserve-guided PCI for stable coronary artery disease. , 2014, The New England journal of medicine.

[15]  Hyung-Bok Park,et al.  Noninvasive Fractional Flow Reserve Derived From Computed Tomography Angiography for Coronary Lesions of Intermediate Stenosis Severity: Results From the DeFACTO Study , 2013, Circulation. Cardiovascular imaging.

[16]  Hyun-Jae Kang,et al.  A novel noninvasive technology for treatment planning using virtual coronary stenting and computed tomography-derived computed fractional flow reserve. , 2014, JACC. Cardiovascular interventions.

[17]  Stefan Baumann,et al.  Comparison of diagnostic value of a novel noninvasive coronary computed tomography angiography method versus standard coronary angiography for assessing fractional flow reserve. , 2014, The American journal of cardiology.

[18]  W. Wijns,et al.  Chasing numbers: the reinvention of clinical science. , 2013, JACC. Cardiovascular interventions.

[19]  A. Dunning,et al.  Diagnosis of ischemia-causing coronary stenoses by noninvasive fractional flow reserve computed from coronary computed tomographic angiograms. Results from the prospective multicenter DISCOVER-FLOW (Diagnosis of Ischemia-Causing Stenoses Obtained Via Noninvasive Fractional Flow Reserve) study. , 2011, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[20]  D. Moher,et al.  Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. , 2010, International journal of surgery.

[21]  U. Siebert,et al.  Fractional flow reserve versus angiography for guiding percutaneous coronary intervention. , 2009, The New England journal of medicine.

[22]  Hongjian Zhu,et al.  Prognostic value of fractional flow reserve: linking physiologic severity to clinical outcomes. , 2014, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[23]  W Wijns,et al.  Fractional Flow Reserve to Determine the Appropriateness of Angioplasty in Moderate Coronary Stenosis: A Randomized Trial , 2001, Circulation.

[24]  William Wijns,et al.  Fractional Flow Reserve to Determine the Appropriateness of Angioplasty in Moderate Coronary Stenosis: A Randomized Trial , 2001, Circulation.

[25]  Volkmar Falk,et al.  2014 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization: The Task Force on Myocardial Revascularization of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS)Developed with the special contribution of the European Association of Percutaneous Ca , 2014, European heart journal.