CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Fractional Flow Reserve

Abstract

Recommended Article

Comparison of Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography, Fractional Flow Reserve, and Perfusion Imaging for Ischemia Diagnosis Diagnostic performance of transluminal attenuation gradient and fractional flow reserve by coronary computed tomographic angiography (FFR(CT)) compared to invasive FFR: a sub-group analysis from the DISCOVER-FLOW and DeFACTO studies 5-Year Outcomes of PCI Guided by Measurement of Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio Versus Fractional Flow Reserve Prognostic Implication of Functional Incomplete Revascularization and Residual Functional SYNTAX Score in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease Use of the Instantaneous Wave-free Ratio or Fractional Flow Reserve in PCI Coronary Computed Tomography-Derived Fractional Flow Reserve Assessment-A Gatekeeper in Intermediate Stenoses Identification of High-Risk Plaques Destined to Cause Acute Coronary Syndrome Using Coronary Computed Tomographic Angiography and Computational Fluid Dynamics Anatomical plaque and vessel characteristics are associated with hemodynamic indices including fractional flow reserve and coronary flow reserve: A prospective exploratory intravascular ultrasound analysis

Clinical TrialVolume 73, Issue 2, January 2019

JOURNAL:J Am Coll Cardiol. Article Link

Comparison of Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography, Fractional Flow Reserve, and Perfusion Imaging for Ischemia Diagnosis

Driessen RS, Danad I, Stuijfzand WJ et al. Keywords: Invasive Cardiovascular Angiography and Intervention; Noninvasive Imaging; Atherosclerotic Disease (CAD/PAD); Interventions and Coronary Artery Disease; Interventions and Imaging; Angiography; Computed Tomography; Nuclear Imaging

ABSTRACT


BACKGROUND - Fractional flow reserve (FFR) computation from coronary computed tomography angiography (CTA) datasets (FFRCT) has emerged as a promising noninvasive test to assess hemodynamic severity of coronary artery disease (CAD), but has not yet been compared with traditional functional imaging.


OBJECTIVES - The purpose of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of FFRCT and compare it with coronary CTA, single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), and positron emission tomography (PET) for ischemia diagnosis.


METHODS - This subanalysis involved 208 prospectively included patients with suspected stable CAD, who underwent 256-slice coronary CTA, 99mTc-tetrofosmin SPECT, [15O]H2O PET, and routine 3-vessel invasive FFR measurements. FFRCT values were retrospectively derived from the coronary CTA images. Images from each modality were interpreted by core laboratories, and their diagnostic performances were compared using invasively measured FFR 0.80 as the reference standard.


RESULTS - In total, 505 of 612 (83%) vessels could be evaluated with FFRCT. FFRCT showed a diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of 87%, 90%, and 86% on a per-vessel basis and 78%, 96%, and 63% on a per-patient basis, respectively. Area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC) for identification of ischemia-causing lesions was significantly greater for FFRCT (0.94 and 0.92) in comparison with coronary CTA (0.83 and 0.81; p < 0.01 for both) and SPECT (0.70 and 0.75; p < 0.01 for both), on a per-vessel and -patient level, respectively. FFRCT also outperformed PET on a per-vessel basis (AUC 0.87; p < 0.01), but not on a per-patient basis (AUC 0.91; p = 0.56). In the intention-to-diagnose analysis, PET showed the highest per-patient and -vessel AUC followed by FFRCT (0.86 vs. 0.83; p = 0.157; and 0.90 vs. 0.79; p = 0.005, respectively).


CONCLUSIONS - In this study, FFRCT showed higher diagnostic performance than standard coronary CTA, SPECT, and PET for vessel-specific ischemia, provided coronary CTA images were evaluable by FFRCT, whereas PET had a favorable performance in per-patient and intention-to-diagnose analysis. Still, in patients in whom 3-vessel FFRCT could be analyzed, FFRCT holds clinical potential to provide anatomic and hemodynamic significance of coronary lesions.