Accuracy of the angiography-based quantitative flow ratio in intermediate left main coronary artery lesions and comparison with visual estimation.

Background: Revascularization of left main coronary artery (LMCA) stenosis is mostly based on angiography. Indices based on angiography might increase accuracy of the decision, although they have been scarcely used in LMCA. The objective of this study is to study the diagnostic agreement of QFR (quantitative flow ratio) with wire-based fractional flow reserve (FFR) in LMCA lesions and to compare with visual severity assessment.

Methods: In a series of patients with invasive FFR assessment of intermediate LMCA stenoses we retrospectively compared the measured value of QFR with that of FFR and the estimate of significance from angiography.

Results: 107 QFR studies were included. The QFR intra-observer and inter-observer agreement was 87% and 82% respectively. The mean QFR-FFR difference was 0.047 ± 0.05 with a concordance of 90.7%, sensitivity 88.1%, specificity 92.3%, positive predictive value 88.1% and negative predictive value 92.3%. All these values were superior to those observed with the visual estimation which showed an intra- and inter-observer agreement of 73% and 72% respectively, besides 78% with the FFR value. The low diagnostic performance of the visual estimation and the acceptable performance of the QFR index measurement were observed in all subgroups analysed.

Conclusions: QFR allows an acceptable estimate of the FFR obtained with intracoronary pressure guidewire in intermediate LMCA lesions, and clearly superior to the assessment based on angiography alone. The decision to revascularize patients with moderate LMCA lesions should not be based solely on the degree of angiographic stenosis.