Evidence mapPaperPMID 37064384Full record

ArticleQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2023

The diagnostic performance of AccuFFRangio for evaluating coronary artery stenosis under different computational conditions.

Wei Wang, Yumeng Hu, Peng Xiang, Xiaosheng Sheng, Xiaochang Leng, Xinyi Yang, Liang Dong, Changling Li, Yong Sun, Jun Jiang and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Wei WangDepartment of Cardiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Hefei, China.
Yumeng HuArteryFlow Technology Co., Ltd., Hangzhou, China.
Peng XiangDepartment of Cardiology, The First People's Hospital of Jiande City, Jiande, China.
Xiaosheng ShengDepartment of Cardiology, Jinhua People's Hospital, Jinhua, China.
Xiaochang LengArteryFlow Technology Co., Ltd., Hangzhou, China.
Xinyi YangArteryFlow Technology Co., Ltd., Hangzhou, China.
Liang DongDepartment of Cardiology, The Second Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, China.
Changling LiDepartment of Cardiology, The Second Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, China.
Yong SunDepartment of Cardiology, The Second Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, China.
Jun JiangDepartment of Cardiology, The Second Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, China.
Jianping XiangArteryFlow Technology Co., Ltd., Hangzhou, China.
Xianhe LinDepartment of Cardiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Hefei, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: A computational method (AccuFFrangio) based on invasive coronary angiography (ICA) and computational fluid dynamics (CFD) to calculate fractional flow reserve (FFR) without a pressure wire has been devised to clarify the physiological significance of coronary stenosis. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of AccuFFRangio computation under different boundary conditions and vessel reconstruction approaches. Methods: Consecutive patients with stable angina pectoris who underwent ICA and FFR assessment from 2 centers were analyzed retrospectively. Using wire-based FFR as the reference standard, the diagnostic performances of AccuFFRangio and its variations were evaluated and compared. The calculation of AccuFFRangio involves several key boundary conditions, including patient-specific aortic pressure, contrast flow velocity derived from the thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) frame count method, and vessel reconstruction based on 2 angiographic views. We considered the following 3 variations: (I) a fixed aortic pressure [fixed pressure AccuFFRangio (pAccuFFRangio)], (II) an empirical hyperemic velocity [fixed velocity AccuFFRangio (vAccuFFRangio)], and (III) vessel reconstruction using a single angiographic view [single view AccuFFRangio (sAccuFFRangio)]. Results: A total of 230 patients with 230 vessels were included in the final analysis. The accuracy for standard AccuFFRangio, pAccuFFRangio, vAccuFFRangio, and sAccuFFRangio was 93.91%, 86.52%, 81.74%, and 83.48%, respectively; the sensitivity was 90.74%, 51.85%, 83.33%, and 46.30%, respectively; the specificity was 94.89%, 97.16%, 81.25%, and 94.89%, respectively; and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.971, 0.928, 0.892, and 0.870, respectively. Conclusions: The comparison suggested that the overall performance of the standard AccuFFRangio was superior to other variations and had the highest accuracy among all the cases.

Indexed as

angiographycoronary artery diseaseFractional flow reserve (FFR)

Identifiers

PMID37064384
PMCPMC10102786

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.