Skip to main content
. 2024 Jan 28;21(1):34–43. doi: 10.26599/1671-5411.2024.01.003

Table 3. Diagnostic performance of UFR- and IVUS-derived MLA to identify FFR ≤ 0.80.

UFR ≤ 0.80 MLA ≤ 4.5 mm2 MLA ≤ 6.0 mm2
Estimate
(95% CI)
Estimate
(95% CI)
Difference
(95% CI)*
P-value Estimate
(95% CI)
Difference
(95% CI)*
P-value
+LR: positive likelihood ratio; −LR: negative likelihood ratio; MLA: minimal lumen area; NPV: negative predictive value; PPV: positive predictive value; UFR: ultrasound flow ratio.
Accuracy (%), n = 41 82.9 (70.2–95.7) 58.5 (42.2–74.8) 24.4 (5.7–43.1) 0.01 80.5 (67.1–93.8) 2.4 (–14.4 to 19.3) 0.78
Sensitivity (%), n = 29 93.1 (82.2–100.0) 48.3 (28.4–68.2) 44.8 (24.2–65.4) < 0.0001 86.2 (71.9–100.0) 6.9 (–10.2 to 24.0) 0.43
Specificity (%), n = 12 58.3 (26.3–90.4) 83.3 (58.1–100.0) –25.0 (–58.4 to 8.4) 0.14 66.7 (35.8–97.5) –8.3 (–43.7 to 27.1) 0.64
PPV (%) 84.4 (70.2–98.5)
n = 32
87.5 (68.2–100.0)
n = 16
–3.1 (–28.3 to 22.1) 0.88 82.8 (67.3–98.2)
n = 29
–1.8 (–22.9 to 19.2) 0.87
NPV (%) 77.8 (45.1–100.0)
n = 9
40.0 (21.1–61.3)
n = 25
37.8 (–3.0 to 78.6) 0.08 66.7 (34.9–90.1)
n = 12
11.1 (–36.7 to 58.9) 0.94
+LR, n = 41 2.23 (1.14–4.40) 2.90 (0.77–10.8) - - 2.59 (1.15–5.83) / /
- LR, n = 41 0.12 (0.03–0.49) 0.62 (0.40–0.96) - - 0.21 (0.08–0.56) / /