Resting Full-Cycle Ratio versus Fractional Flow Reserve: A SWEDEHEART-Registry-Based Comparison of Two Physiological Indexes for Assessing Coronary Stenosis Severity

Table 3

Concordance between RFR and FFR.

	High FFR/high RFR	High FFR/low RFR	Low FFR/high RFR	Low FFR/low RFR	Concordance (n (%))	Discordance (n (%))
All vessels	87 (43.5%)	24 (12.0%)	18 (9.0%)	71 (35.5%)	158 (79.0%)	42 (21.0%)
LAD	21 (21.4%)	16 (16.3%)	8 (8.2%)	53 (54.1%)	74 (75.5%)	24 (24.5%)
RCA	22 (53.7%)	5 (12.2%)	6 (14.6%)	8 (19.5%)	30 (73.2%)	11 (26.8%)
LCX	43 (75.4%)	2 (3.5%)	4 (7.0%)	8 (14.0%)	51 (89.5%)	6 (10.5%)

Note. Values are expressed as n (%). FFR , values ≤0.80 indicate low FFR and >0.80 high FFR. RFR, values ≤0.89 indicate low RFR and >0.89 high RFR. Concordance was defined as the number of correctly identified lesions divided by the total number of lesions, while discordance was defined as the number of incorrectly identified lesions divided by the total number of lesions. FFR, fractional flow reserve; LAD, left anterior descending coronary artery; LCX, left circumflex coronary artery; RCA, right coronary artery; RFR, resting full-cycle ratio.