Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 27, 2025

In vitro Assessment of Aortic Regurgitation Using Four-Dimensional Flow Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Published on: February 25, 2022
The effects of cardiac structure, valvular regurgitation, and left ventricular diastolic dysfunction on the
Junqing Yang1, Yuming Huang2, Xiaoshan Li3,4
1Department of Cardiology, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Coronary Heart Disease Prevention, Guangdong Cardiovascular Institute, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital (Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences), Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Insights
Quantitative flow ratio (μQFR) accurately assesses coronary stenosis in patients with complex cardiac conditions. This novel method shows excellent agreement with fractional flow reserve (FFR), unaffected by structural or functional abnormalities.
Area of Science:
- Cardiovascular medicine
- Interventional cardiology
- Diagnostic imaging
Background:
- Quantitative flow ratio (μQFR) is a novel fluid dynamics method for deriving fractional flow reserve (FFR).
- Previous studies on μQFR primarily focused on patients with normal cardiac structure and function.
- The diagnostic accuracy of μQFR in patients with abnormal cardiac structure, diastolic dysfunction, or valvular regurgitation remains unclear.
Purpose of the Study:
- To investigate the diagnostic accuracy of Murray law-based quantitative flow ratio (μQFR) using a single angiographic view.
- To evaluate μQFR's performance in patients with abnormal cardiac structure, left ventricular diastolic dysfunction, and valvular regurgitation.
- To compare μQFR with pressure wire-derived fractional flow reserve (FFR).
Main Methods:
- Retrospective analysis of 261 patients (286 vessels) who underwent both FFR and μQFR before intervention.
- Cardiac structure and function assessed using echocardiography.
- Hemodynamically significant coronary stenosis defined as FFR ≤0.80.
Main Results:
- μQFR demonstrated a moderate correlation with FFR (r=0.73, p<0.001) and no significant difference (0.006 ± 0.075, p=0.192) via Bland-Altman analysis.
- Diagnostic accuracy of μQFR was 94.06%, with sensitivity 82.56%, specificity 99.00%, PPV 97.26%, and NPV 92.96% compared to FFR.
- Concordance between μQFR and FFR was not associated with abnormal cardiac structure, valvular regurgitation, or left ventricular diastolic function.
Conclusions:
- μQFR shows excellent agreement with FFR in assessing coronary stenosis.
- Abnormal cardiac structure, valvular regurgitation, and diastolic dysfunction do not impact μQFR's diagnostic accuracy.
- Coronary hemodynamics are not significantly different in patients with cardiac abnormalities compared to those without.
Objective:
The study aimed to investigate the diagnostic accuracy of Murray law-based quantitative flow ratio (μQFR) from a single angiographic view in patients with abnormal cardiac structure, left ventricular diastolic dysfunction, and valvular regurgitation.
Background:
μQFR is a novel fluid dynamics method for deriving fractional flow reserve (FFR). In addition, current studies of μQFR mainly analyzed patients with normal cardiac structure and function. The accuracy of μQFR when patients had abnormal cardiac structure, left ventricular diastolic dysfunction, and valvular regurgitation has not been clear.
Methods:
This study retrospectively analyzed 261 patients with 286 vessels that underwent both FFR and μQFR prior to intervention. The cardiac structure and function were measured using echocardiography. Pressure wire-derived FFR ≤0.80 was defined as hemodynamically significant coronary stenosis.
Results:
μQFR had a moderate correlation with FFR (r = 0.73, p < 0.001), and the Bland-Altman plot presented no difference between the μQFR and FFR (0.006 ± 0.075, p = 0.192). With FFR as the standard, the diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of μQFR were 94.06% (90.65-96.50), 82.56% (72.87-89.90), 99.00% (96.44-99.88), 97.26 (89.91-99.30), and 92.96% (89.29-95.44), respectively. The concordance of μQFR/FFR was not associated with abnormal cardiac structure, valvular regurgitation (aortic valve, mitral valve, and tricuspid valve), and left ventricular diastolic function. Coronary hemodynamics showed no difference between normality and abnormality of cardiac structure and left ventricular diastolic function. Coronary hemodynamics demonstrated no difference among valvular regurgitation (none, mild, moderate, or severe).
Conclusion:
μQFR showed an excellent agreement with FFR. The effect of abnormal cardiac structure, valvular regurgitation, and left ventricular diastolic function did not correlate with the diagnostic accuracy of μQFR. Coronary hemodynamics showed no difference in patients with abnormal cardiac structure, valvular regurgitation, and left ventricular diastolic function.
More Related Videos
12:12Echocardiographic Approaches and Protocols for Comprehensive Phenotypic Characterization of Valvular Heart Disease in Mice
Published on: February 14, 2017
11:04Quantification of Global Diastolic Function by Kinematic Modeling-based Analysis of Transmitral Flow via the Parametrized Diastolic Filling Formalism
Published on: September 1, 2014
Related Concept Videos
Mitral Stenosis I: Introduction
Mitral Regurgitation I: Introduction
Mitral Regurgitation II: Clinical Features and Diagnostic Tests
Aortic Regurgitation II: Clinical Features and Diagnostic Tests
Mitral Stenosis II: Clinical features and Diagnostic Tests
Mitral Regurgitation IV: Nursing Management