Percutaneous Coronary InterventionAQVANCT04664140
QFR-based Virtual PCI Versus Angio-guided PCI
A study testing QFR-based virtual PCI and angiography-based PCI in people with Percutaneous Coronary Intervention and Coronary Physiology, run by University Hospital of Ferrara at 3 sites in Italy.
Trial summary
A significant portion of patients continue to experience both adverse events and symptoms after angiographically successful PCI. Beyond different underlying mechanisms non-related to epicardial disease (vasospasm, microcirculatory dysfunction), several recent studies have shown that in at least 15-20% of PCIs, a… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Percutaneous Coronary Intervention, Coronary Physiology
- What is being tested?
- QFR-based virtual PCI and angiography-based PCI
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 300 participants
- Where
- 3 sitesItaly
- Study dates
- 20 Feb 2021to 9 May 2023
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Indication to PCI for either acute or chronic coronary syndrome
- Signed informed consent
Who cannot join
- Planned surgical revascularization
- Prior Coronary Artery Bypass Graft (CABG) Surgery
- Culprit lesion of STEMI or NSTEMI
- Clinical or angiographic features limiting QFR computation:
- Left main or ostial right coronary artery
- Atrial fibrillation
Show all 11Show fewer
- Ongoing ventricular arrhythmias
- Significant and persistent tachycardia
- Revascularization of a chronic total occlusion
- Non-cardiovascular co-morbidity reducing life expectancy to < 1 year
- Any factor precluding 1-year follow-up
Trial locations and contacts
3 sites in 1 country.
Italy3 sites
University Hospital of Ferrara
Cona, Ferrara, 44124
University Hospital Federico II
Naples
Azienda Ospedaliera Santa Maria
Reggio Emilia
About this study
Official title: Angio-based Quantitative Flow Ratio Virtual PCI Versus Conventional Angio-guided PCI in the Achievement of an Optimal Post-PCI QFR
A significant portion of patients continue to experience both adverse events and symptoms after angiographically successful PCI. Beyond different underlying mechanisms non-related to epicardial disease (vasospasm, microcirculatory dysfunction), several recent studies have shown that in at least 15-20% of PCIs, a prognostically meaningful ischemia, detected with different coronary physiology tools, is present at the end of a successful angiography-guided PCI. In addition, physiology is able to discriminate the underlying reason causing the suboptimal functional result, namely: i) in-stent drop; ii) focal drop outside stent; iii) diffuse disease.
However, the use of post-PCI physiology is still very low, even when it is utilized pre-PCI to set the indication for stenting. Lack of dedicated randomized clinical trials and procedural lengthening and increase in side effects are at the basis of this underutilization.
Read more
In addition, the ideal tool should allow to plan the intervention in advance rather than to assess the results afterwards. To this hand, QFR is particularly appealing, among available physiology tools, because it does not need wire or adenosine and allows: i) identification of disease mechanism; ii) co-registration with angiography; iii) pre-PCI planning with residual vessel QFR value according to a pre-specified treatment.
Taken all this characteristics together, QFR is the ideal technology for virtual PCI.
The hypothesis of the present investigation is that a procedural planning based on QFR (virtual PCI) is able to reduce the rate of patients with post-PCI suboptimal functional result, that has been found to correlate with prognosis in our earlier study, if compared to the traditional angio-guided PCI.
Read the detailed description
Post-percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) physiology The results of functional assessment performed after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) taught us that a "successful" angiography-guided PCI is often suboptimal in terms of physiology and that physiology result after PCI is closely linked to outcome. Yet, post-PCI physiology is rarely utilized in clinical practice, being employed in less than 10% of lesions investigated with physiology pre-PCI. Reasons for the low use of functional assessment post-PCI and for subsequent intervention are manifold. First, physiology is actually used after PCI only in cases where it was utilized pre-PCI. Second, randomized clinical trials (RCT) addressing the use of physiology to assess PCI results have not been performed, therefore clear instructions and cutoffs for its use are lacking. Third, when fractional flow reserve (FFR) is measured, the need to administer adenosine several times during the same procedure results in increased procedure time, cost and adverse side effects. Fourth, in case of a post-PCI suboptimal functional result, it may be difficult to ascertain the underlying cause.
New indices and tools have been developed in an effort to overcome barriers to the widespread adoption of functional assessment. Non-hyperaemic pressure indices (NHPI) including, resting distal to aortic coronary pressure ratio (Pd/Pa), and other resting indices have enabled functional evaluation without pharmacological arteriolar vasodilation, while angiography-based functional assessment have eliminated the need for a dedicated pressure wire.
Importantly, these newer tools may allow operators to understand the mechanism underlying an abnormal physiology value after angiographically successful intervention. In fact, the real novelty related to their development is the shift from a binary interpretation of physiology (positive/negative) to a quantitative site-specific one. For these reasons, they are extremely appealing post-PCI and several studies have been recently conducted to validate them in this setting.
Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) In particular, quantitative flow ratio (QFR) is an angiographically-derived estimate of FFR developed as an alternative to wire-based intracoronary physiology. One advantage of angio-based FFR systems is allowing the generation of a pullback curve and discrimination of the physiological contribution of each single lesion as well as diagnosis of diffuse disease. The value of QFR to assess the functional results of PCI has been tested in the prospective Angio-Based Fractional Flow Reserve to Predict Adverse Events After Stent Implantation (HAWKEYE) study. Seven hundred fifty-one vessels in 602 patients undergoing angiographically satisfactory second-generation drug eluting stent (DES) implantation were analyzed. At the end of the procedure, the operator acquired projections for QFR computation performed offline by an independent core laboratory. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis identified a post-PCI QFR best cut-off of <0.90 (area under the curve 0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.74-0.80; p< 0.001). After correction for potential confounding factors, post-PCI QFR<0.90 was associated with a 3-fold increase in risk for the vessel-oriented composite endpoint at 2 years (HR: 2.91; 95% CI 1.63-5.19; p< 0.001). Further, a very important finding of the HAWKEYE study was the demonstration that QFR could discriminate among different coronary artery disease (CAD) patterns. In vessels with suboptimal functional result, the site of the QFR drop was in-stent in 13% of the cases, while a focal drop outside the stent was identifiable in 32% of the cases. Thirty-four percent of vessels showed diffuse disease, while in 21% a combination of the aforementioned possibilities was present. It is important to note that QFR analyzability depends on quality of angiography and it is feasible in around 80% of the cases. Moreover, QFR is not applicable in specific lesion subsets such as left main, bifurcation and ostial lesions.
Virtual PCI The inherent limit of post-PCI physiology is to add measurement and consequent actions after the end of a procedure that has been deemed successful by the same operator who is performing it. In addition, it is associated with the increase in procedural time and costs. Thus, a broad application of post-PCI physiology, although clinically meaningful, is implausible.
On the contrary, the systematic application of QFR before stenting to simulate PCI results according to different treatment strategies (virtual PCI) would be an interesting alternative to achieve a fully physiology guided procedure.
The advantages of a virtual PCI strategy based on QFR application are:
- QFR is a simple tool, based on what the operator already performs before PCI (namely two perpendicular angiographic projections) and not requiring wire or adenosine.
- It enables to obtain a full physiologic map of the vessel with a point-by-point detailed information of the functional impact of a given stenosis.
- It is possible to simulate the treatment of one or more lesions (virtual PCI) in order to estimate the final functional value post-PCI.
Then, virtual PCI based on QFR utilization would not increase procedural time or costs and could obtain an optimal post-PCI physiology result in most cases. The "Angio-based Quantitative flow ratio Virtual PCI versus Conventional Angio-guided PCI in the achievement of an optimal post-PCI QFR" (AQVA) trial is the first step toward this direction and will be the basis for a bigger study focused on hard clinical endpoints.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate:
- The rate of lesions with a final post-PCI QFR≥0.90 in patients treated with the QFR virtual PCI versus patients treated with an angiography-based PCI.
- The rate of vessel-oriented composite endpoint (VOCE), defined as the composite of vessel-related cardiovascular death, vessel-related myocardial infarction (MI), and ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization (TVR).
SAMPLE SIZE CALCULATION
In the HAWKEYE trial population, 16% of lesions presented a post-PCI QFR <0.90 after an angio-guided PCI. In one third of these lesions, low post-PCI QFR was due to diffuse disease. Therefore, the investigators hypothesize that a procedural plan with QFR could be able to reduce the rate of lesions with QFR<0.90 by two thirds. Considering that some of the lesions with focal disease could also present diffuse disease, the investigators can realistically estimate a reduction by 60% with virtual-PCI. Therefore, 300 patients are required to have a 80% chance of detecting, as significant at the 5% level, an increase in the percentage of patient achieving a post-PCI QFR≥0.90 from 84% in the angio-guided group to 94% in the virtual PCI group.
- Being tested
- QFR-based virtual PCI, angiography-based PCI
- Keywords
- angio-based FFR, percutaneous coronary intervention
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
QFR-based virtual PCIOther
Also called angio-FFR based virtual PCI
Procedural planning of PCI based on the pullback trace given by the QFR systems in order to obtain an optimized functional result after PCI
angiography-based PCIOther
Also called angio-based PCI
PCi according to international guidelines, local protocols and practice
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| QFR-based virtual PCI | Experimental | Before starting PCI, the operator must acquire QFR angiographic projections after nitroglycerin administration at 15 frames/second. Angiographic projections should be at least 25 apart, aiming for minimal vessel foreshortening and minimal vessel overlap. In agreement with previous studies, operators follow a table of recommended projection angles. Afterwards, online QFR analysis must be performed. The tool "residual vessel QFR" should be used to anticipate the result of stenting (virtual PCI) by placing the proximal (p) and distal (d) marker in order to obtain a post-PCI QFR ≥0.90. then, the operator has to implant one or more stents following the pre-PCI plan and utilizing the QFR and angio to place the stent(s) according to the virtual PCI plan. Post-dilation with non-compliant (NC) balloon is strongly suggested. Blinded QFR projections must be obtained after PCI. Receives: Other: QFR-based virtual PCI |
| Angiography-based PCI | Active comparator | Invasive coronary angiography and PCI are performed following best local practices. Post-dilation with a noncompliant balloon is strongly suggested. Blinded QFR projections must be obtained before and after PCI. Receives: Other: angiography-based PCI |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
post-PCI QFR
proportion of patients with a final post-PCI QFR result ≥0.90
Measured: end of the procedure
Secondary outcomes (1)
vessel-oriented composite endpoint (VOCE)
composite of vessel-related cardiovascular death, vessel-related MI, and ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization (TVR)
Measured: 1 year
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted11 Dec 2020
- Study start20 Feb 2021
- Primary completion27 Dec 2021
- Study completion9 May 2023
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (6)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Percutaneous Coronary InterventionStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- Randomized clinical trial
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 300 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University Hospital of Ferrara
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Gianluca Campo, University Hospital of Ferrara
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04664140
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 1021/2020/Sper/AOUFe
- Acronym
- AQVA
- Status last verified
- May 2023
- First submitted
- 4 Dec 2020
- Last updated
- 10 May 2023
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
Publications
Biscaglia S, Tebaldi M, Brugaletta S, Cerrato E, Erriquez A, Passarini G, Ielasi A, Spitaleri G, Di Girolamo D, Mezzapelle G, Geraci S, Manfrini M, Pavasini R, Barbato E, Campo G. Prognostic Value of QFR Measured Immediately After Successful Stent Implantation: The International Multicenter Prospective HAWKEYE Study. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2019 Oct 28;12(20):2079-2088. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2019.06.003. Epub 2019 Sep 25.
PubMed 31563688Jeremias A, Davies JE, Maehara A, Matsumura M, Schneider J, Tang K, Talwar S, Marques K, Shammas NW, Gruberg L, Seto A, Samady H, Sharp A, Ali ZA, Mintz G, Patel M, Stone GW. Blinded Physiological Assessment of Residual Ischemia After Successful Angiographic Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: The DEFINE PCI Study. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2019 Oct 28;12(20):1991-2001. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2019.05.054.
PubMed 31648761Tebaldi M, Biscaglia S, Fineschi M, Musumeci G, Marchese A, Leone AM, Rossi ML, Stefanini G, Maione A, Menozzi A, Tarantino F, Lodolini V, Gallo F, Barbato E, Tarantini G, Campo G. Evolving Routine Standards in Invasive Hemodynamic Assessment of Coronary Stenosis: The Nationwide Italian SICI-GISE Cross-Sectional ERIS Study. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2018 Aug 13;11(15):1482-1491. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2018.04.037. Epub 2018 May 23.
PubMed 29803695Piroth Z, Toth GG, Tonino PAL, Barbato E, Aghlmandi S, Curzen N, Rioufol G, Pijls NHJ, Fearon WF, Juni P, De Bruyne B. Prognostic Value of Fractional Flow Reserve Measured Immediately After Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2017 Aug;10(8):e005233. doi: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.116.005233.
PubMed 28790165Marrone A, Erriquez A, Verardi FM, Colaiori I, Cocco M, Caglioni S, Tumscitz C, Penzo C, Marchini F, Meinen J, McNutt J, Buijs JOD, Chiu WC, Versaci F, Campo G, Biscaglia S. Additional Value of Optical Coherence Tomography-Derived Virtual Flow Reserve for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Guidance. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2025 Dec;106(7):3456-3464. doi: 10.1002/ccd.70207. Epub 2025 Sep 23.
PubMed 40988408Biscaglia S, Verardi FM, Tebaldi M, Guiducci V, Caglioni S, Campana R, Scala A, Marrone A, Pompei G, Marchini F, Scancarello D, Pignatelli G, D'Amore SM, Colaiori I, Demola P, Di Serafino L, Tumscitz C, Penzo C, Erriquez A, Manfrini M, Campo G. QFR-Based Virtual PCI or Conventional Angiography to Guide PCI: The AQVA Trial. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2023 Apr 10;16(7):783-794. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2022.10.054. Epub 2023 Mar 8.
PubMed 36898939
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 10 May 2023. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Angio-based Quantitative Flow Ratio Virtual PCI Versus Conventional Angio-guided PCI in the Achievement of an Optimal Post-PCI QFR
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04664140
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- AQVA / 1021/2020/Sper/AOUFe
- Keywords
- angio-based FFR, percutaneous coronary intervention
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 300 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University Hospital of FerraraUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 20 Feb 2021 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 27 Dec 2021 (actual)
- Study completion
- 9 May 2023 (actual)
- First posted
- 11 Dec 2020 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
A significant portion of patients continue to experience both adverse events and symptoms after angiographically successful PCI. Beyond different underlying mechanisms non-related to epicardial disease (vasospasm, microcirculatory dysfunction), several recent studies have shown that in at least 15-20% of PCIs, a prognostically meaningful ischemia, detected with different coronary physiology tools, is present at the end of a successful angiography-guided PCI. In addition, physiology is able to discriminate the underlying reason causing the suboptimal functional result, namely: i) in-stent drop; ii) focal drop outside stent; iii) diffuse disease.
However, the use of post-PCI physiology is still very low, even when it is utilized pre-PCI to set the indication for stenting. Lack of dedicated randomized clinical trials and procedural lengthening and increase in side effects are at the basis of this underutilization.
In addition, the ideal tool should allow to plan the intervention in advance rather than to assess the results afterwards. To this hand, QFR is particularly appealing, among available physiology tools, because it does not need wire or adenosine and allows: i) identification of disease mechanism; ii) co-registration with angiography; iii) pre-PCI planning with residual vessel QFR value according to a pre-specified treatment.
Taken all this characteristics together, QFR is the ideal technology for virtual PCI.
The hypothesis of the present investigation is that a procedural planning based on QFR (virtual PCI) is able to reduce the rate of patients with post-PCI suboptimal functional result, that has been found to correlate with prognosis in our earlier study, if compared to the traditional angio-guided PCI.
Detailed description
Post-percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) physiology The results of functional assessment performed after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) taught us that a "successful" angiography-guided PCI is often suboptimal in terms of physiology and that physiology result after PCI is closely linked to outcome. Yet, post-PCI physiology is rarely utilized in clinical practice, being employed in less than 10% of lesions investigated with physiology pre-PCI. Reasons for the low use of functional assessment post-PCI and for subsequent intervention are manifold. First, physiology is actually used after PCI only in cases where it was utilized pre-PCI. Second, randomized clinical trials (RCT) addressing the use of physiology to assess PCI results have not been performed, therefore clear instructions and cutoffs for its use are lacking. Third, when fractional flow reserve (FFR) is measured, the need to administer adenosine several times during the same procedure results in increased procedure time, cost and adverse side effects. Fourth, in case of a post-PCI suboptimal functional result, it may be difficult to ascertain the underlying cause.
New indices and tools have been developed in an effort to overcome barriers to the widespread adoption of functional assessment. Non-hyperaemic pressure indices (NHPI) including, resting distal to aortic coronary pressure ratio (Pd/Pa), and other resting indices have enabled functional evaluation without pharmacological arteriolar vasodilation, while angiography-based functional assessment have eliminated the need for a dedicated pressure wire.
Importantly, these newer tools may allow operators to understand the mechanism underlying an abnormal physiology value after angiographically successful intervention. In fact, the real novelty related to their development is the shift from a binary interpretation of physiology (positive/negative) to a quantitative site-specific one. For these reasons, they are extremely appealing post-PCI and several studies have been recently conducted to validate them in this setting.
Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) In particular, quantitative flow ratio (QFR) is an angiographically-derived estimate of FFR developed as an alternative to wire-based intracoronary physiology. One advantage of angio-based FFR systems is allowing the generation of a pullback curve and discrimination of the physiological contribution of each single lesion as well as diagnosis of diffuse disease. The value of QFR to assess the functional results of PCI has been tested in the prospective Angio-Based Fractional Flow Reserve to Predict Adverse Events After Stent Implantation (HAWKEYE) study. Seven hundred fifty-one vessels in 602 patients undergoing angiographically satisfactory second-generation drug eluting stent (DES) implantation were analyzed. At the end of the procedure, the operator acquired projections for QFR computation performed offline by an independent core laboratory. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis identified a post-PCI QFR best cut-off of <0.90 (area under the curve 0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.74-0.80; p< 0.001). After correction for potential confounding factors, post-PCI QFR<0.90 was associated with a 3-fold increase in risk for the vessel-oriented composite endpoint at 2 years (HR: 2.91; 95% CI 1.63-5.19; p< 0.001). Further, a very important finding of the HAWKEYE study was the demonstration that QFR could discriminate among different coronary artery disease (CAD) patterns. In vessels with suboptimal functional result, the site of the QFR drop was in-stent in 13% of the cases, while a focal drop outside the stent was identifiable in 32% of the cases. Thirty-four percent of vessels showed diffuse disease, while in 21% a combination of the aforementioned possibilities was present. It is important to note that QFR analyzability depends on quality of angiography and it is feasible in around 80% of the cases. Moreover, QFR is not applicable in specific lesion subsets such as left main, bifurcation and ostial lesions.
Virtual PCI The inherent limit of post-PCI physiology is to add measurement and consequent actions after the end of a procedure that has been deemed successful by the same operator who is performing it. In addition, it is associated with the increase in procedural time and costs. Thus, a broad application of post-PCI physiology, although clinically meaningful, is implausible.
On the contrary, the systematic application of QFR before stenting to simulate PCI results according to different treatment strategies (virtual PCI) would be an interesting alternative to achieve a fully physiology guided procedure.
The advantages of a virtual PCI strategy based on QFR application are:
- QFR is a simple tool, based on what the operator already performs before PCI (namely two perpendicular angiographic projections) and not requiring wire or adenosine.
- It enables to obtain a full physiologic map of the vessel with a point-by-point detailed information of the functional impact of a given stenosis.
- It is possible to simulate the treatment of one or more lesions (virtual PCI) in order to estimate the final functional value post-PCI.
Then, virtual PCI based on QFR utilization would not increase procedural time or costs and could obtain an optimal post-PCI physiology result in most cases. The "Angio-based Quantitative flow ratio Virtual PCI versus Conventional Angio-guided PCI in the achievement of an optimal post-PCI QFR" (AQVA) trial is the first step toward this direction and will be the basis for a bigger study focused on hard clinical endpoints.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate:
- The rate of lesions with a final post-PCI QFR≥0.90 in patients treated with the QFR virtual PCI versus patients treated with an angiography-based PCI.
- The rate of vessel-oriented composite endpoint (VOCE), defined as the composite of vessel-related cardiovascular death, vessel-related myocardial infarction (MI), and ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization (TVR).
SAMPLE SIZE CALCULATION
In the HAWKEYE trial population, 16% of lesions presented a post-PCI QFR <0.90 after an angio-guided PCI. In one third of these lesions, low post-PCI QFR was due to diffuse disease. Therefore, the investigators hypothesize that a procedural plan with QFR could be able to reduce the rate of lesions with QFR<0.90 by two thirds. Considering that some of the lesions with focal disease could also present diffuse disease, the investigators can realistically estimate a reduction by 60% with virtual-PCI. Therefore, 300 patients are required to have a 80% chance of detecting, as significant at the 5% level, an increase in the percentage of patient achieving a post-PCI QFR≥0.90 from 84% in the angio-guided group to 94% in the virtual PCI group.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- Randomized clinical trial
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| QFR-based virtual PCI | Experimental | Other: QFR-based virtual PCIBefore starting PCI, the operator must acquire QFR angiographic projections after nitroglycerin administration at 15 frames/second. Angiographic projections should be at least 25 apart, aiming for minimal vessel foreshortening and minimal vessel overlap. In agreement with previous studies, operators follow a table of recommended projection angles. Afterwards, online QFR analysis must be performed. The tool "residual vessel QFR" should be used to anticipate the result of stenting (virtual PCI) by placing the proximal (p) and distal (d) marker in order to obtain a post-PCI QFR ≥0.90. then, the operator has to implant one or more stents following the pre-PCI plan and utilizing the QFR and angio to place the stent(s) according to the virtual PCI plan. Post-dilation with non-compliant (NC) balloon is strongly suggested. Blinded QFR projections must be obtained after PCI. |
| Angiography-based PCI | Active comparator | Other: angiography-based PCIInvasive coronary angiography and PCI are performed following best local practices. Post-dilation with a noncompliant balloon is strongly suggested. Blinded QFR projections must be obtained before and after PCI. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Indication to PCI for either acute or chronic coronary syndrome
- Signed informed consent
Key exclusion criteria (11 listed)
- Planned surgical revascularization
- Prior Coronary Artery Bypass Graft (CABG) Surgery
- Culprit lesion of STEMI or NSTEMI
- Clinical or angiographic features limiting QFR computation:
- Left main or ostial right coronary artery
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| QFR-based virtual PCIAlso: angio-FFR based virtual PCIProcedural planning of PCI based on the pullback trace given by the QFR systems in order to obtain an optimized functional result after PCI | Other | QFR-based virtual PCI |
| angiography-based PCIAlso: angio-based PCIPCi according to international guidelines, local protocols and practice | Other | Angiography-based PCI |
Primary outcome
post-PCI QFR
Time frame: end of the procedure
proportion of patients with a final post-PCI QFR result ≥0.90
1 secondary outcome
vessel-oriented composite endpoint (VOCE)
Time frame: 1 year
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 10 May 2023.
- Background: PubMed 31563688Biscaglia S, Tebaldi M, Brugaletta S, Cerrato E, Erriquez A, Passarini G, Ielasi A, Spitaleri G, Di Girolamo D, Mezzapelle G, Geraci S, Manfrini M, Pavasini R, Barbato E, Campo G. Prognostic Value of QFR Measured Immediately After Successful Stent Implantation: The International Multicenter Prospective HAWKEYE Study. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2019 Oct 28;12(20):2079-2088. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2019.06.003. Epub 2019 Sep 25.
- Background: PubMed 31648761Jeremias A, Davies JE, Maehara A, Matsumura M, Schneider J, Tang K, Talwar S, Marques K, Shammas NW, Gruberg L, Seto A, Samady H, Sharp A, Ali ZA, Mintz G, Patel M, Stone GW. Blinded Physiological Assessment of Residual Ischemia After Successful Angiographic Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: The DEFINE PCI Study. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2019 Oct 28;12(20):1991-2001. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2019.05.054.
- Background: PubMed 29803695Tebaldi M, Biscaglia S, Fineschi M, Musumeci G, Marchese A, Leone AM, Rossi ML, Stefanini G, Maione A, Menozzi A, Tarantino F, Lodolini V, Gallo F, Barbato E, Tarantini G, Campo G. Evolving Routine Standards in Invasive Hemodynamic Assessment of Coronary Stenosis: The Nationwide Italian SICI-GISE Cross-Sectional ERIS Study. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2018 Aug 13;11(15):1482-1491. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2018.04.037. Epub 2018 May 23.
- Background: PubMed 28790165Piroth Z, Toth GG, Tonino PAL, Barbato E, Aghlmandi S, Curzen N, Rioufol G, Pijls NHJ, Fearon WF, Juni P, De Bruyne B. Prognostic Value of Fractional Flow Reserve Measured Immediately After Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2017 Aug;10(8):e005233. doi: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.116.005233.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 40988408Marrone A, Erriquez A, Verardi FM, Colaiori I, Cocco M, Caglioni S, Tumscitz C, Penzo C, Marchini F, Meinen J, McNutt J, Buijs JOD, Chiu WC, Versaci F, Campo G, Biscaglia S. Additional Value of Optical Coherence Tomography-Derived Virtual Flow Reserve for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Guidance. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2025 Dec;106(7):3456-3464. doi: 10.1002/ccd.70207. Epub 2025 Sep 23.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 36898939Biscaglia S, Verardi FM, Tebaldi M, Guiducci V, Caglioni S, Campana R, Scala A, Marrone A, Pompei G, Marchini F, Scancarello D, Pignatelli G, D'Amore SM, Colaiori I, Demola P, Di Serafino L, Tumscitz C, Penzo C, Erriquez A, Manfrini M, Campo G. QFR-Based Virtual PCI or Conventional Angiography to Guide PCI: The AQVA Trial. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2023 Apr 10;16(7):783-794. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2022.10.054. Epub 2023 Mar 8.
Related trials for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention
Recruiting
Algorithm-based Tailoring of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy to Improve Outcomes Following Percutaneous Coronary Interventions
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention, Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors
RecruitingPhase 3
Safety and Efficacy of Very Short DAPT in Older Patients Undergoing PCI
Coronary Artery Disease (CAD), Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI)
Not yet recruiting
ADVA ACE Coronary Stent System in Coronary Artery Disease Patients (ADVANCE)
Coronary Artery Disease, De Novo Stenosis Lesion
Recruiting
Pivotal Study of the SUpira System in Patients Undergoing High-Risk Percutaneous COronaRy InTervention (HRPCI)
Coronary Artery Disease, High Risk Percutaneous Coronary Intervention
RecruitingPhase 4
Inclisiran Versus Placebo for the Prevention of Major Adverse Cardiovascular and Limb Events in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention or Peripheral Endovascular Intervention
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention, Peripheral Endovascular Intervention
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
3 sites in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing QFR-based virtual PCI and angiography-based PCI in people with Percutaneous Coronary Intervention and Coronary Physiology, run by University Hospital of Ferrara at 3 sites in Italy.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 2 inclusion and 11 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 10 May 2023. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 3 sites in Italy. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
post-PCI QFR (time frame: end of the procedure). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT04664140, which also lists 6 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 10 May 2023.