In this study, patients were retrospectively included, univariate and multivariate analysis of factors affecting their diagnosis inconsistencies was performed, and a new diagnostic model was constructed by logistic regression.
The evaluation of coronary function is becoming more and more important in the guidelines, in which coronary flow reserve (FFR) is the gold standard for diagnosis, but its measurement process requires the application of adenosine, vasodilator, etc. Some patients cannot be measured because of asthma and low blood pressure. A new instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR), contrastive flow reserve fraction (cFFR) and quantitative flow fraction (QFR) have been developed for the evaluation of coronary function. However, in some patients, the new coronary function evaluation methods were inconsistent with FFR. In this study, patients were retrospectively included, univariate and multivariate analysis of factors affecting their diagnosis inconsistencies was performed, and a new diagnostic model was constructed by logistic regression.
Study Type
OBSERVATIONAL
Enrollment
500
the discordance between fractional flow reserve and quantitative flow ratio
If FFR≤0.80 and QFR ≤0.8 or FFR \> 0.80 and QFR \> 0.8 are consistent groups, otherwise they are inconsistent group
Time frame: When the patient has completed coronary angiography and received a diagnosis
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.