Scholarlink

Objective <p>To evaluate the efficacy of drug-coated balloon (DCB) treatment for coronary artery stenosis guided by quantitative flow ratio (QFR) and the clinical applicability of virtual balloon planning.</p> Methods <p>A single-center retrospective study was conducted on 48 patients (52 lesions). Changes in minimum lumen diameter (MLD) and QFR values before and after treatment were examined. Paired testing and the Bland–Altman method were employed to assess the consistency between the virtual balloon size (length/diameter) and actual size used in clinical practice.</p> Results <p>MLD and QFR values improved significantly after DCB treatment (MLD: 1.20 ± 0.40&#xa0;mm to 2.15 ± 0.50&#xa0;mm, <i>P</i> &lt; 0.001; QFR: 0.78 ± 0.14 to 0.94 ± 0.04, <i>P</i> &lt; 0.001), with a complication rate of 1.92%. The virtual balloon length was significantly shorter than the actual length (15.65 ± 11.88&#xa0;mm vs. 20 ± 8&#xa0;mm, <i>P</i> &lt; 0.001). No significant bias was observed in the balloon diameter (2.55 ± 0.6&#xa0;mm vs. 2.75 ± 0.5&#xa0;mm, <i>P</i> = 0.443), although the 95% limits of agreement were wide (–0.70 to 0.78&#xa0;mm), with a clinical concordance rate (± 0.5&#xa0;mm) of 84.91%.</p> Conclusion <p>QFR-guided DCB treatment effectively improves hemodynamic and anatomical parameters with good short-term safety. However, virtual balloon planning algorithms require optimization to enhance clinical applicability and the accuracy of balloon size prediction.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Precise intervention of drug-coated balloons based on quantitative flow ratio: treatment efficacy and virtual planning adaptability evaluation

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年3月3日

查看全文
  • Qingmin Zhou,
  • Xinyuan Zhao,
  • Hangzhou Luo

摘要

Objective

To evaluate the efficacy of drug-coated balloon (DCB) treatment for coronary artery stenosis guided by quantitative flow ratio (QFR) and the clinical applicability of virtual balloon planning.

Methods

A single-center retrospective study was conducted on 48 patients (52 lesions). Changes in minimum lumen diameter (MLD) and QFR values before and after treatment were examined. Paired testing and the Bland–Altman method were employed to assess the consistency between the virtual balloon size (length/diameter) and actual size used in clinical practice.

Results

MLD and QFR values improved significantly after DCB treatment (MLD: 1.20 ± 0.40 mm to 2.15 ± 0.50 mm, P < 0.001; QFR: 0.78 ± 0.14 to 0.94 ± 0.04, P < 0.001), with a complication rate of 1.92%. The virtual balloon length was significantly shorter than the actual length (15.65 ± 11.88 mm vs. 20 ± 8 mm, P < 0.001). No significant bias was observed in the balloon diameter (2.55 ± 0.6 mm vs. 2.75 ± 0.5 mm, P = 0.443), although the 95% limits of agreement were wide (–0.70 to 0.78 mm), with a clinical concordance rate (± 0.5 mm) of 84.91%.

Conclusion

QFR-guided DCB treatment effectively improves hemodynamic and anatomical parameters with good short-term safety. However, virtual balloon planning algorithms require optimization to enhance clinical applicability and the accuracy of balloon size prediction.