The value of quantitative flow ratio in the hemodynamic evaluation of myocardial bridge

Abstract

Objective: To explore the application value of quantitative flow ratio (QFR) in the hemodynamic evaluation of myocardial bridge and to preliminarily evaluate the correlation and related influencing factors between deformation quantitative flow ratio (D-QFR) and QFR. Methods: This is a cross-sectional study. Patients with CAG-confirmed simple myocardial bridge of the middle anterior descending coronary artery from June 2012 to June 2022 at the Air Force Medical Center were retrospectively included in this study. Systolic stenosis of mural coronary arteries (MCA) and myocardial bridge length were measured using quantitative coronary angiography. The patients were divided into mild stenosis group (<50% systolic stenosis) and moderate-to-severe stenosis group (≥50% systolic stenosis) according to the Nobel grading criteria. At different time periods (systolic and diastolic), the QFR values were measured at 3 locations (1 to 2 cm before the MCA entrance, the middle segment of the MCA, and 1 to 2 cm after the MCA exit), denoted as QFRa, QFRb, and QFRc, respectively, and the D-QFR values, incorporating vessel deformation information, were recorded. The MCA distal QFR≤0.8 in either stage was defined as an abnormal QFR value. QFR values were compared between the two groups at different locations and within each group. Factors associated with abnormal QFR values were analysed using multifactorial logistic regression. Spearman rank correlation analysis was used to examine the correlation between D-QFR values and systolic and diastolic QFR values.Multiple linear regression was used to analyse the factors associated with D-QFR. Results: A total of 83 patients were enrolled, including 58 males, aged (57.1±13.1) years. There were 48 cases in the mild stenosis group and 35 cases in the moderate-to-severe stenosis group, and the differences in systolic and diastolic QFRb and QFRc values between the two groups were statistically significant (all P<0.05). Within-group comparisons showed the values of QFRb and QFRc in the systolic phase were lower than those in the diastolic phase; QFRb and QFRc were both lower than QFRa during the same period (all P<0.05). Multifactorial logistic regression analysis showed that MCA systolic stenosis (OR=1.225, 95%CI 1.093-1.372, P<0.001) was an influential factor for abnormal QFR. D-QFR values were positively correlated with both systolic and diastolic QFR values (correlation coefficients were 0.849 and 0.675, respectively, both P<0.01). Multiple linear regression analysis showed that D-QFR values were negatively correlated with age (β=-0.208, P=0.029), systolic stenosis (β=-0.500, P<0.001), and myocardial bridge length (β=-0.211, P=0.036). Conclusions: The QFR values in middle and distal of myocardial bridge decrease. The systolic stenosis rate of myocardial bridge is an important factor affecting QFR value. D-QFR is positively correlated with both systolic and diastolic QFR values. Age, myocardial bridge systolic stenosis rate and length are factors influencing the D-QFR values.