This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

Background To explore the clinical benefits of revascularization in patients with different levels of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) from the perspective of quantitative flow ratio (QFR). Methods Patients who underwent successful percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and one-year angiographic follow-up were retrospectively screened and computed by QFR analysis. Based on their LVEF, 301 eligible patients were classified into reduced LVEF (≤ 50%, n = 48) and normal LVEF (> 50%, n = 253) groups. Pre-PCI QFR, post-PCI QFR, follow-up QFR, late lumen loss (LLL), LVEF and major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs) at one year were compared between groups. Results The reduced LVEF group had a lower mean pre-PCI QFR than the normal LVEF group (0.67 ± 0.16 vs. 0.73 ± 0.15, p = 0.004), but no significant difference was found in the post-PCI or one-year follow-up QFR. No association was found between LVEF and QFR at pre-PCI or follow-up. The reduced LVEF group had greater increases in QFR (0.27 ± 0.18 vs. 0.22 ± 0.15, p = 0.043) and LVEF (6.05 ± 9.45% vs. − 0.37 ± 8.11%, p < 0.001) than the normal LVEF group. The LLL results showed no difference between the two groups, indicating a similar degree of restenosis. The reduced LVEF group had a higher incidence of MACCEs (14.6% vs. 4.3%, p = 0.016), which was mainly due to the higher risk of heart failure (6.3% vs. 0%, p = 0.004). Conclusion Compared to the corresponding normal LVEF patients, patients with reduced LVEF who underwent successful PCI were reported to have greater increases in QFR and LVEF, a similar degree of restenosis, and a higher incidence of MACCEs due to a higher risk of heart failure. It seems that patients with reduced LVEF gain more coronary benefits from successful revascularization from the perspective of flow physiology evaluations.

Purpose: The change in coronary physiology from lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) lacks an appropriate method of examination. Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) is a novel angiography-based approach allowing rapid assessment of coronary physiology. This study sought to determine the impact of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goal achievement on coronary physiology through QFR.Methods: Cases involving percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and 1-year angiographic follow-up were screened and assessed by QFR analysis. Patients were divided into two groups according to the LDL-C level at the 1-year follow-up: (1) goal-achievement group (LDL-C &lt; 1.8 mmol/L or reduction of ≥50%, n = 146, lesion = 165) and (2) non-achievement group (n = 286, lesion = 331). All QFR data and major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs) at 1 year were compared between groups.Results: No differences between the groups in quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) data or QFR post-PCI were found. At the 1-year follow-up, lower percentage diameter stenosis (DS%) and percentage area stenosis (AS%) were recorded in the goal-achievement group (27.89 ± 10.16 vs. 30.93 ± 12.03, p = 0.010, 36.57 ± 16.12 vs. 41.68 ± 17.39, p = 0.003, respectively). Additionally, a better change in QFR was found in the goal-achievement group (0.003 ± 0.068 vs. −0.018 ± 0.086, p = 0.007), with a lower incidence of physiological restenosis and MACCEs (2.1 vs. 8.4%, p = 0.018, 5.4 vs. 12.6%, p = 0.021, respectively).Conclusion: Evaluated by QFR, patients who achieved the LDL-C goal appear to have a better coronary physiological benefit. This group of patients also has a better clinical outcome.

Aims/Introduction There are mixed opinions on the influence of diabetes on the prognosis of patients receiving percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Therefore, in this study, the quantitative flow ratio (QFR), an emerging technology of functional evaluation, was used to explore the impact of diabetes on coronary physiology in patients who underwent PCI. Materials and Methods Patients who underwent successful PCI and a 1‐year angiographic follow up were retrospectively screened and analyzed by the QFR. Based on the presence or absence of diabetes, 677 enrolled patients (794 vessels) were classified into a diabetes group (211 patients, 261 vessels) and a non‐diabetes group (466 patients, 533 vessels). The results of QFR analysis and clinical outcomes were compared between the two groups. Results The two groups reached a similar level of post‐PCI QFR (0.95 ± 0.09 vs 0.96 ± 0.06, P = 0.292). However, at the 1‐year follow up, the QFR was lower (0.93 ± 0.11 vs 0.96 ± 0.07, P < 0.001), and the degree of QFR decline was more obvious (−0.024 ± 0.090 vs −0.008 ± 0.070, P = 0.023) in the diabetes group. Additionally, diabetes was independently associated with functional restenosis (odds ratio 2.164, 95% confidence interval 1.210–3.870, P = 0.009) and target vessel failure (odds ratio 2.654, 95% confidence interval 1.405–5.012, P = 0.003). Conclusion As evaluated by the QFR, patients with diabetes received less coronary physiological benefit from PCI, which was consistent with their clinical outcomes.