Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 15, 2026

Myocardial Infarction and Functional Outcome Assessment in Pigs
Published on: April 25, 2014
Diagnostic Accuracy of Quantitative Flow Ratio for Assessing Myocardial Ischemia in Prior Myocardial Infarction
Hiroki Emori1, Takashi Kubo1, Takeyoshi Kameyama1
1Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Wakayama Medical University.
Insights
Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) may be less accurate for assessing coronary stenosis in prior myocardial infarction (MI) areas. This study found reduced diagnostic accuracy of QFR compared to fractional flow reserve (FFR) in these specific coronary arteries.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Interventional Cardiology
- Medical Imaging
Background:
- Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) is a novel index for assessing coronary stenosis functional severity.
- QFR is derived from 3D quantitative coronary angiography and may not account for viable myocardium in prior myocardial infarction (MI).
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the accuracy of QFR (fixed-flow QFR [fQFR] and contrast-flow QFR [cQFR]) against fractional flow reserve (FFR) in coronary arteries with and without prior MI.
Main Methods:
- Analyzed fQFR, cQFR, and FFR in 75 prior-MI-related and 75 non-prior-MI-related coronary arteries.
- Correlated QFR measurements with FFR values.
- Assessed diagnostic accuracy of QFR for predicting FFR ≤0.80.
Main Results:
- Both fQFR and cQFR showed strong correlations with FFR in all analyzed arteries.
- fQFR was significantly lower than FFR in prior-MI-related arteries, unlike in non-prior-MI-related arteries.
- Diagnostic accuracy of fQFR and cQFR for predicting FFR ≤0.80 was numerically lower in prior-MI-related arteries.
Conclusions:
- The accuracy of QFR in assessing functional coronary stenosis severity may be reduced in arteries with a history of MI when compared to non-MI-related arteries, using FFR as the gold standard.
Background:
A novel index of the functional severity of coronary stenosis, quantitative flow ratio (QFR), may not consider the amount of viable myocardium in prior myocardial infarction (MI) because QFR is calculated from 3D quantitative coronary angiography.
Methods And Results:
We analyzed QFR (fixed-flow QFR [fQFR] and contrast-flow QFR [cQFR]) and fractional flow reserve (FFR) in prior-MI-related coronary arteries (n=75) and non-prior-MI-related coronary arteries (n=75). Both fQFR and cQFR directly correlated with FFR in the prior-MI-related coronary arteries (fQFR: r=0.84, P<0.001; and cQFR: r=0.88, P<0.001) and the non-prior-MI-related coronary arteries (fQFR: r=0.91, P<0.001; and cQFR: r=0.94, P<0.001). fQFR was significantly smaller than FFR in the prior-MI-related coronary arteries (0.73±0.14 vs. 0.79±0.11, P=0.002), but there was no significant difference between fQFR and FFR in the non-prior-MI-related coronary arteries. The value of cQFR minus FFR was significantly lower in the prior-MI-related coronary arteries compared with the non-prior-MI-related coronary arteries (-0.02±0.06 vs. 0.00±0.04, P=0.010). The diagnostic accuracy of fQFR ≤0.8 and cQFR ≤0.8 for predicting FFR ≤0.80 was numerically lower in the prior-MI-related coronary arteries compared with the non-prior-MI-related coronary arteries (fQFR: 77% vs. 87%; and cQFR: 87% vs. 92%).
Conclusions:
When FFR is used as the gold standard, the accuracy of QFR for assessing the functional severity of coronary stenosis might be reduced in the prior-MI-related coronary arteries compared with non-prior-MI-related coronary arteries.
Related Concept Videos
Improving Translational Accuracy
Improving Translational Accuracy
Uncertainty in Measurement: Accuracy and Precision
Accuracy and Precision
Poisson's Ratio
Odds Ratio

