Dataset Information

Effect of guidewire insertion in fractional flow reserve procedure for real geometry using computational fluid dynamics.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Coronary artery disease is an abnormal contraction of the heart supply blood vessel. It limits the oxygenated blood flow to the heart. Thus, diagnosing its severity helps physicians to select the appropriate treatment plan. Fractional flow reserve (FFR) is the most accurate method to pinpoint the stenosis severity. However, inserting the guidewire across stenosis may cause a false overestimation of severity.

Methods

To estimate the errors due to guidewire insertion, reconstructed three-dimensional coronary artery geometry from a patient-specific scan is used. A comprehensive three-dimensional blood flow model is developed. Blood is considered non-Newtonian and the flow is pulsatile. The model is numerically simulated using realistic boundary conditions.

Results

The FFR value is calculated and compared with the actual flow ratio. Additionally, the ratio between pressure drop and distal dynamic pressure (CDP) is studied. The obtained results for each case are compared and analyzed with the case without a guidewire. It was found that placing the guidewire leads to overestimating the severity of moderate stenosis. It reduces the FFR value from 0.43 to 0.33 with a 23.26% error compared to 0.44 actual flow ratio and the CDP increases from 5.31 to 7.2 with a 35.6% error. FFR value in mild stenosis does not have a significant change due to placing the guidewire. The FFR value decreases from 0.83 to 0.82 compared to the 0.83 actual flow ratio.

Conclusion

Consequently, physicians should consider these errors while deciding the treatment plan.

SUBMITTER: Abuouf Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8479905 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) is a novel modality for physiological lesion assessment based on 3-dimensional vessel reconstructions and contrast flow velocity estimates. We evaluated the value of online QFR during routine invasive coronary angiography for procedural feasibility, diagnostic performance, and agreement with pressure-wire-derived fractional flow reserve (FFR) as a gold standard in an international multicenter study. METHODS AND RESULTS:FAVOR II E-J (Functional Assessment by Various Flow Reconstructions II Europe-Japan) was a prospective, observational, investigator-initiated study. Patients with stable angina pectoris were enrolled in 11 international centers. FFR and online QFR computation were performed in all eligible lesions. An independent core lab performed 2-dimensional quantitative coronary angiography (2D-QCA) analysis of all lesions assessed with QFR and FFR. The primary comparison was sensitivity and specificity of QFR compared with 2D-QCA using FFR as a reference standard. A total of 329 patients were enrolled. Paired assessment of FFR, QFR, and 2D-QCA was available for 317 lesions. Mean FFR, QFR, and percent diameter stenosis were 0.83±0.09, 0.82±10, and 45±10%, respectively. FFR was ?0.80 in 104 (33%) lesions. Sensitivity and specificity by QFR was significantly higher than by 2D-QCA (sensitivity, 86.5% (78.4-92.4) versus 44.2% (34.5-54.3); P<0.001; specificity, 86.9% (81.6-91.1) versus 76.5% (70.3-82.0); P=0.002). Area under the receiver curve was significantly higher for QFR compared with 2D-QCA (area under the receiver curve, 0.92 [0.89-0.96] versus 0.64 [0.57-0.70]; P<0.001). Median time to QFR was significantly lower than median time to FFR (time to QFR, 5.0 minutes [interquartile range, -6.1] versus time to FFR, 7.0 minutes [interquartile range, 5.0-10.0]; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS:Online computation of QFR in the catheterization laboratory is clinically feasible and is superior to angiographic assessment for evaluation of intermediary coronary artery stenosis using FFR as a reference standard. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION:URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT02959814.