Table 1. Optimal IVUS-defined minimal luminal area (MLA) values to best predict FF.
Study | Patient/lesions | FFR | Best MLA cut-off (mm2) | Sensitivity (%) | Specificity (%) | NPV (%) | PPV (%) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LMCA studies | |||||||
Park 2014 (36) | 112/112 | 0.80 | 4.5 | 78.7 | 80.4 | 75.9 | 82.8 |
Jasti 2004 (32) | 55/55 | 0.75 | 5.9 | 93.0 | 95.0 | – | – |
Kang 2011 (35) | 55/55 | <0.80 | 4.8 | 89.0 | 83.0 | 89.0 | 82.0 |
<0.75 | 4.1 | 95.0 | 83.0 | 97.0 | 75.0 | ||
Non-LMCA studies | |||||||
Takagi 1999 (37) | 42/51 | 0.75 | 3.00 | 83.0 | 92.3 | – | – |
Lee 2010 (38) | 94/94 | 0.75 | 2.00 | 87.9 | 78.9 | – | – |
Briguori 2001 (39) | 43/53 | 0.75 | 4.00 | 92.0 | 56.0 | 96.0 | 46.0 |
Koo 2011 (40) | 252/267 | 0.80 | All 2.75 | 69.0 | 65.0 | – | – |
Prox-LAD 3.00 | 75.0 | 88.0 | 75.0 | 88.0 | |||
Mid-LAD 2.75 | 73.0 | 78.0 | 83.0 | 68.0 | |||
RCA 3.00 | 86.0 | 50.0 | 96.0 | 22.0 | |||
Ben-Dor 2012 (41) | 185/205 | 0.80 | 3.09 | 69.2 | 79.5 | – | – |
Kang 2012 (42) | 692/784 | 0.80 | 2.40 | 84.0 | 63.0 | 90.0 | 48.0 |
Yang 2014 (43) | 206/206 | 0.80 | Prox-LAD 3.20 | 85.1 | 66.7 | – | – |
Mid-LAD 2.50 | 65.1 | 87.7 | – | – | |||
Han 2014 (44) | 822/881 | 0.80 | 2.75 | 61.0 | 63.0 | 73.0 | 49.0 |
580/623 | 0.80 | 2.75 | 65.0 | 68.0 | – | – | |
242/258 | 0.80 | 3.00 | 63.0 | 69.0 | – | – | |
Waksman 2013 (45) | 350/367 | 0.80 | 3.07 | 64.0 | 65.0 | 83.0 | 40.0 |
Cui 2013 (46) | 141/165 | 0.80 | 3.15 | 71.4 | 67.0 | 85.3 | 52.6 |
Naganuma 2014 (47) | 109/132 | 0.80 | 2.70 | 80.0 | 76.0 | 89.9 | 58.5 |
Gonzalo 2012 (48) | 56/61 | 0.80 | 2.36 | 67.0 | 65.0 | 65.0 | 67.0 |
Ben-Dor 2011(49) | 84/92 | 0.80 | 3.20 | 69.2 | 68.3 | – | – |
0.75 | 2.80 | 79.7 | 80.3 | – | – | ||
Brown 2017 (50) | 89/92 | 0.80 | 2.65 | 58.3 | 67.6 | – | – |
NPV, negative predictive value; PPV, positive predictive value; MLA, minimal luminal area; FFR, fractional flow reserve; LMCA, left main coronary artery.