Introduction:
The aim of this study was to evaluate diagnostic performance of wireless fractional flow reserve (FFR) used in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD).

Material and methods:
PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase and Clinical trial.gov databases were searched by computer search and manual retrieval. The search terms included fractional flow reserve, quantitative coronary angiography, computational fluid dynamics and coronary artery disease. The meta-analysis was conducted with Stata12.0. Clinical outcomes included accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (+LR), negative likelihood ratio (–LR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) and area under the receiver operating curve.

Results:
Nine studies comprising 2052 vessels were included in the present meta-analysis. The sensitivity, specificity, +LR, –LR, DOC and accuracy were 87% (95% CI: 83–94%), 88% (95% CI: 82–92%), 7.28 (95% CI: 4.78–11.08), 0.14 (95% CI: 0.10–0.21), 50.69 (95% CI: 25.22–101.88) and 0.94 (95% CI: 0.91–0.96) respectively. No significant publication bias was detected.

Conclusions:
This meta-analysis suggests that the clinical performance such as accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of wireless FFR is good to detect stenotic lesions with pressure-wire measured FFR as a reference.