Efficacy of IVUS-Based Fractional Flow Reserve in Patients With Intermediate Left Main Stenosis

Authors

  • Muhammad Ismail Khan Department of Cardiology, HSP, Mianwali, Pakistan
  • Adeela Shahzadi Department of Cardiology, Pervaiz Elahi Institute of Cardiology, Bahawalpur, Pakistan
  • Dost Muhammad Department of Cardiology, RIC Rawalpindi, Pakistan
  • Nouman Nazeer Department of Cardiology, NICVD Karachi, Pakistan
  • Shahrukh Ahmed Department of Cardiology, CPEIC Multan, Pakistan

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.54112/bcsrj.v6i7.1875

Keywords:

Angiography, Coronary stenosis, Fractional Flow Reserve, Intravascular Ultrasound, Left primary coronary artery disease, Ultrasonic Flow Ratio

Abstract

Assessment of intermediate left main (LM) coronary artery stenosis remains clinically challenging. Wire-based fractional flow reserve (FFR) is considered the gold standard. Still, the use of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS)-derived functional indices, such as ultrasonographic flow ratio (UFR), is emerging as a potential non-wire alternative for physiological lesion assessment. Objective: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy and efficacy of IVUS-based FFR (UFR) compared to wire-based FFR in patients with intermediate LM coronary artery stenosis. Methods: A prospective study was conducted at a tertiary care cardiology hospital from May 2024 to May 2025. A total of 100 adult patients with angiographically intermediate LM stenosis (defined as 50–70% diameter stenosis) were included. IVUS was performed using a motorized pullback device operating at 0.5 mm/s, from a distal point in the left coronary artery up to the aortic ostium. UFR was calculated based on IVUS pullback data. Wire-based FFR was recorded by positioning a pressure guidewire in the downstream coronary branches. The diagnostic performance of UFR was assessed using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, with wire-based FFR (cut-off <0.80) as the reference standard. Results: There was a moderate correlation between UFR and FFR (r = 0.692, p < 0.0001). UFR demonstrated a high area under the curve (AUC = 0.88; 95% CI: 0.91–0.99) for detecting functionally significant LM stenosis, outperforming angiography (AUC = 0.71, p < 0.001) and minimum lumen area (MLA) measurement (AUC = 0.79, p = 0.11). The optimal UFR threshold showed a diagnostic accuracy of 83.2%, superior to MLA ≤ 4.5 mm² (59.1%) and comparable to MLA ≤ 6.0 mm² (81.4%). Sensitivity for UFR, MLA ≤ 4.5 mm², and MLA ≤ 6.0 mm² was 92.7%, 48.6%, and 85.8%, respectively. FFR-based specificity was 57.6%, with a positive predictive value of 85.5%, negative predictive value of 78.3%, favorable likelihood ratio (+LR) of 2.19 (95% CI: 1.16–4.34), and negative likelihood ratio (–LR) of 0.09 (95% CI: 0.05–0.52). Conclusion: IVUS-derived FFR (UFR) demonstrated high diagnostic accuracy and sensitivity, comparable or superior to wire-based FFR in identifying functionally significant intermediate LM stenosis. UFR may offer a reliable, less invasive alternative to pressure-wire-based assessment in select patients.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Sui Y., Yang M., Xu Y., Wu N., & Qian J. Diagnostic performance of intravascular ultrasound‐based fractional flow reserve versus angiography‐based quantitative flow ratio measurements for evaluating left main coronary artery stenosis. Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions 2022;99(S1):1403-1409. https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.30078

Sui Y., Yang C., Guan C., Xu Y., Wu N., Yang W.et al.. Diagnostic performance of intravascular ultrasound-based fractional flow reserve in evaluating intermediate left main stenosis. Journal of Geriatric Cardiology 2024;21(1):34-43. https://doi.org/10.26599/1671-5411.2024.01.003

Kim J., Choi W., Kim K., Nam C., Hong B., Kim J.et al.. The current status of intervention for intermediate coronary stenosis in the Korean Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (K-PCI) registry. Korean Circulation Journal 2019;49(11):1022. https://doi.org/10.4070/kcj.2019.0074

Gillmore T., Jung R., Moreland R., Santo P., Stotts C., Makwana D.et al.. Impact of intracoronary assessments on revascularization decisions: a contemporary evaluation. Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions 2022;100(6):955-963. https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.30417

Huang W., Zhang J., Yang L., Hu Y., Leng X., Liu Y.et al.. Accuracy of intravascular ultrasound-derived virtual fractional flow reserve (ffr) and ffr derived from computed tomography for functional assessment of coronary artery disease. Biomedical Engineering Online 2023;22(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12938-023-01122-x

Geng L., Du P., Yuan Y., Gao L., Wang Y., Li J.et al.. Impact of arterial remodeling of intermediate coronary lesions on long-term clinical outcomes in patients with stable coronary artery disease: an intravascular ultrasound study. Journal of Interventional Cardiology 2021;2021:1-10. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/9915759

Leesar M., Mering G., & Jneid H. New insights into intravascular imaging of coronary bifurcation lesions and left main stenosis: what have we accomplished?. Cardiology Discovery 2022;2(3):182-190. https://doi.org/10.1097/cd9.0000000000000069

Ding D., Zhang J., Wu P., Wang Z., Shi H., Yu W.et al.. Prognostic value of postpercutaneous coronary intervention Murray-law-based quantitative flow ratio. Jacc Asia 2025;5(1):59-70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacasi.2024.10.019

D'Ascenzo F., Improta R., Giacobbe F., Pietro G., Zugna D., Siliano S.et al.. Assessing diagnostic accuracy of intravascular imaging for functionally significant coronary stenosis: updated findings from a meta-analysis. Heart 2024;111(5):195-204. https://doi.org/10.1136/heartjnl-2024-324499

Okada K., Hibi K., Matsushita K., Yagami H., Tamura K., Honda Y.et al.. Intravascular ultrasound radiofrequency signal analysis of blood speckles: physiological assessment of intermediate coronary artery stenosis. Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions 2019;96(2). https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.28612

Hong D., Lee S., Lee J., Lee H., Shin D., Kim H.et al.. Cost-effectiveness of fractional flow reserve–guided treatment for acute myocardial infarction and multivessel disease. Jama Network Open 2024;7(1):e2352427. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.52427

Milzi A., Dettori R., Lubberich R., Burgmaier K., Marx N., Reith S.et al.. Quantitative flow ratio is related to anatomic left main stem lesion parameters as assessed by intravascular imaging. Journal of Clinical Medicine 2022;11(20):6024. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm11206024

Bi L., Geng Y., Wang Y., Li S., Sun K., Guo Y.et al.. An updated meta-analysis of optimal medical therapy with or without invasive therapy in patients with stable coronary artery disease. BMC Cardiovascular Disorders 2024;24(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12872-024-03997-7

Park D., Vemmou E., An S., Nikolakopoulos I., Regan C., Cambi B.et al.. Trends and impact of intravascular ultrasound and optical coherence tomography on percutaneous coronary intervention for myocardial infarction. Ijc Heart & Vasculature 2023;45:101186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcha.2023.101186

Starczyński M., Dudek S., Baruś P., Niedzieska E., Wawrzeńczyk M., Ochijewicz D.et al.. Intravascular imaging versus physiological assessment versus biomechanics—which is a better guide for coronary revascularization? Diagnostics 2023;13(12):2117. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics13122117

Chen L., Dai L., Xu J., Duan L., Hou X., Zhang L.et al.. Chinese herbal compound preparation Qing-xin-jie-yu granules for intermediate coronary lesions in patients with stable coronary artery disease: study protocol for a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Plos One 2024;19(7):e0307074. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0307074

Park D., An S., Jolly N., Attanasio S., Yadav N., Gutierrez J.et al.. Comparison of intravascular ultrasound, optical coherence tomography, and conventional angiography‐guided percutaneous coronary interventions: a systematic review, network meta‐analysis, and meta‐regression. Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions 2023;102(3):440-450. https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.30784

Pattanaprateep O., Limpijankit T., Anothaisintawee T., Siriyotha S., Sansanayudh N., & Thakkinstian A. Cost-utility analysis of different treatment modalities in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: Thai PCI Registry. 2024. https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.10.10.24315276

Her A., Shin E., Liew H., Nuruddin A., Tang Q., Hsieh C.et al.. Drug-coated balloon treatment in coronary artery disease: recommendations from an Asia-Pacific consensus group. Cardiology Journal 2021;28(1):136-149. https://doi.org/10.5603/cj.a2019.0093

Tomaniak M., Masdjedi K., Zandvoort L., Neleman T., Forero M., Vermaire A.et al.. Correlation between 3D-QCA-based FFR and quantitative lumen assessment by IVUS for left main coronary artery stenoses. Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions 2020;97(4). https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.29151

Caiati C., Pollice P., Iacovelli F., Sturdà F., & Lepera M. Accelerated stenotic flow in the left anterior descending coronary artery explains the causes of impaired coronary flow reserve: an integrated transthoracic enhanced Doppler study. Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine 2023;10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2023.1186983

Hwang D., Koo B., Zhang J., Park J., Yang S., Kim M.et al.. Prognostic implications of fractional flow reserve after coronary stenting. Jama Network Open 2022;5(9):e2232842. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.32842

Hwang D., Kim H., Ko J., Choi H., Jeong H., Jang S.et al.. Cost-effectiveness of fractional flow reserve versus intravascular ultrasound to guide percutaneous coronary intervention: results from the flavour study. Korean Circulation Journal 2025;55(1):34. https://doi.org/10.4070/kcj.2024.0156

Tsigkas G., Bourantas G., Μούλιας Α., Karamasis G., Bekiris F., Davlouros P.et al.. Rapid and precise computation of fractional flow reserve from routine two-dimensional coronary angiograms based on fluid mechanics: the pilot ffr2d study. Journal of Clinical Medicine 2024;13(13):3831. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13133831

Neumann F., Sousa‐Uva M., Ahlsson A., Alfonso F., Banning A., Benedetto U.et al. 2018 ESC/EACTS guidelines on myocardial revascularization. Eurointervention 2019;14(14):1435-1534. https://doi.org/10.4244/eijy19m01_01

Lee J., Ahn S., Jeon H., Lee J., Youn Y., Zhang J.et al.. Discordance between angiographic assessment and fractional flow reserve or intravascular ultrasound in intermediate coronary lesions: a post-hoc analysis of the flavour trial. Korean Circulation Journal 2024;54(8):485. https://doi.org/10.4070/kcj.2024.0046

Yang S., Kang J., Hwang D., Zhang J., Jiang J., Hu X.et al.. Physiology- or imaging-guided strategies for intermediate coronary stenosis. Jama Network Open 2024;7(1):e2350036. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.50036

Downloads

Published

2025-07-31

How to Cite

Khan, M. I. ., Shahzadi, A. ., Muhammad, D. ., Nazeer, N. ., & Ahmed, S. . (2025). Efficacy of IVUS-Based Fractional Flow Reserve in Patients With Intermediate Left Main Stenosis. Biological and Clinical Sciences Research Journal, 6(7), 101–105. https://doi.org/10.54112/bcsrj.v6i7.1875

Issue

Section

Original Research Articles

Most read articles by the same author(s)