Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 6, 2025

Four-Dimensional Computed Tomography-Guided Valve Sizing for Transcatheter Pulmonary Valve Replacement
Published on: January 20, 2022
Quantitative flow ratio-guided versus angiography-guided operation for valve disease accompanying coronary heart
Wenlong Yan1, Yangyang Wang2, Xin Zheng3
1Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao University, Qingdao, China.
Insights
A quantitative flow ratio (QFR)-guided strategy for valve replacement plus coronary artery bypass graft (VR+CABG) surgery significantly reduced major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) at one year compared to angiography guidance.
Area of Science:
- Cardiovascular Surgery
- Interventional Cardiology
- Medical Imaging and Diagnostics
Background:
- Valve replacement combined with coronary artery bypass graft (VR+CABG) surgery typically has higher mortality and complication rates.
- Angiography is the standard method for guiding CABG procedures.
- There is a need to explore strategies that can improve clinical outcomes in VR+CABG patients.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate if a quantitative flow ratio (QFR)-guided strategy can enhance clinical outcomes in patients undergoing VR+CABG.
- To compare the efficacy of QFR-guided revascularization versus traditional angiography-guided revascularization in this patient population.
Main Methods:
- A retrospective study of 536 patients undergoing VR+CABG between January 2018 and December 2021.
- Patients were divided into a QFR-guided group (n=116) and an angiography-guided group (n=420).
- Propensity score matching was used to minimize selection bias, followed by a 1-year assessment of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE).
Main Results:
- The QFR-guided group demonstrated significantly shorter operative times, extracorporeal circulation times, and clamp times.
- Intraoperative bleeding volume was also significantly less in the QFR-guided group.
- The 1-year MACCE rate was significantly lower in the QFR-guided group (6.9%) compared to the angiography-guided group (14.7%).
Conclusions:
- A QFR-guided strategy appears to optimize the surgical procedure for VR+CABG.
- This strategy is associated with superior clinical outcomes, evidenced by a reduced 1-year MACCE rate compared to angiography guidance.
- QFR guidance may represent a more effective approach for revascularization in patients undergoing combined VR+CABG.
Background:
Valve replacement combined with coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) operation (VR + CABG) is usually associated with higher mortality and complication rates. Currently, angiography remains the most commonly used approach to guide CABG. The aim of this study is to investigate whether a quantitative flow ratio (QFR)-guided strategy can improve the clinical outcomes of VR + CABG.
Methods:
Patients (n = 536) treated by VR + CABG between January 2018 and December 2021 were retrospectively assessed. In 116 patients, all lesions were revascularized entirely based on QFR (the QFR-guided group), whereas in 420 patients, all lesions were revascularized entirely based on angiography (the angiography-guided group). To minimize selection bias between the 2 groups, propensity score matching was performed at a ratio of 1:2. The primary endpoint of the study was the rate of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) at 1-year, which was defined as a composite of cardiac mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), any repeat revascularization, and stroke.
Results:
No statistically significant differences were observed in the baseline clinical characteristics between the QFR-guided and angiography-guided groups after propensity score matching. The mean age of all patients was 66.2 years [standard deviation (SD) = 8.3], 370 (69%) were men, the mean body-mass index of the population was 24.8 kg/m2 (SD = 4.5), 129 (24%) had diabetes, and 229 (43%) had angina symptoms. When compared with the angiography-guided group, the QFR-guided group had a significantly shorter operative time (323 ± 60 min vs. 343 ± 71 min, P = 0.010), extra corporal circulation time (137 ± 38 min vs. 155 ± 62 min, P = 0.004), clamp time (73 ± 19 min vs. 81 ± 18 min, P < 0.001), and less intraoperative bleeding volume (640 ± 148 ml vs. 682 ± 166 ml, P = 0.022). Compared with the angiography-guided group, the 1-year MACCE was significantly lower in the QFR-guided group (6.9% vs. 14.7%, P = 0.036, hazard ratio = 0.455, 95% confidence interval: 0.211-0.982).
Conclusion:
Our results raise the hypothesis that among patients who undergo VR + CABG, QFR-guided strategy is associated with optimized surgical procedure and a superior clinical outcome, as evidenced by a lower rate of MACCE at 1-year compared with conventional angiography-guided strategy.
Related Concept Videos
Aortic Regurgitation III: Medical Management
Cardiac Catheterization III: Left Heart Catheterization
Mitral Stenosis III: Medical Management
Cardiac Catheterization I: Pre-Procedure Overview

