Validation of Resting Diastolic Pressure Ratio Calculated by a Novel Algorithm and Its Correlation With Distal Coronary Artery Pressure to Aortic Pressure, Instantaneous Wave–Free Ratio, and Fractional Flow Reserve: The dPR Study

• Published in: Circulation. Cardiovascular interventions Vol. 11; no. 12; p. e006911
• Main Authors: Ligthart, Jurgen, Masdjedi, Kaneshka, Witberg, Karen, Mastik, Frits, van Zandvoort, Laurens, Lemmert, Miguel E, Wilschut, Jeroen, Diletti, Roberto, de Jaegere, Peter, Zijlstra, Felix, Kardys, Isabella, Van Mieghem, Nicolas M, Daemen, Joost
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: American Heart Association, Inc 01.12.2018
• ISSN: 1941-7640; 1941-7632
• DOI: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.118.006911

BACKGROUND:Instantaneous wave–free ratio (iFR) offers a reliable non–hyperemic assessment of coronary physiology but requires dedicated proprietary software with a fully automated algorithm. We hypothesized that dPR (diastolic pressure ratio), calculated with novel universal software, has a strong correlation with iFR, similar diagnostic accuracy relative to resting distal coronary artery pressure/aortic pressure and fractional flow reserve (FFR). METHODS AND RESULTS:The dPR study is an observational, retrospective, single-center cohort study including patients who underwent iFR or FFR. Dedicated software was used to calculate the dPR from Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) pressure waveforms. The flat period on the pressure difference between sample (dP) to the time difference between the same sample points (dt) signal was used to detect automatically the period, where the resistance is low and constant, and to calculate the dPR, which is an average over 5 consecutive heartbeats. The software was validated by correlating iFR results with dPR. Software validation was done by comparing 78 iFR measurements in 44 patients who underwent iFR. Mean iFR and dPR were 0.91±0.10 and 0.92±0.10, respectively, with a significant linear correlation (R=0.997; P<0.001). Diagnostic accuracy was tested in 100 patients who underwent FFR. Mean FFR, resting distal coronary artery pressure/aortic pressure, and dPR were 0.85±0.09, 0.94±0.05, and 0.93±0.07, respectively. There was a significant linear correlation between dPR and FFR (R=0.77; P<0.001). Both distal coronary artery pressure/aortic pressure and dPR had good diagnostic accuracy in the identification of lesions with an FFR ≤0.80 (area under the curve, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.76–0.92 and 0.86; 95% CI, 0.78–0.93, respectively). CONCLUSIONS:dPR, calculated by a novel validated software tool, showed a strong linear correlation with iFR. dPR correlated well with FFR with a good diagnostic accuracy to identify positive FFR.