Hemodynamic impact of coronary stenosis using computed tomography: comparison between noninvasive fractional flow reserve and 3D fusion of coronary angiography with stress myocardial perfusion.
Adult
Aged
Computed Tomography Angiography
/ methods
Coronary Angiography
/ methods
Coronary Artery Disease
/ diagnostic imaging
Coronary Stenosis
/ diagnostic imaging
Disease Progression
Female
Fractional Flow Reserve, Myocardial
Hemodynamics
Humans
Imaging, Three-Dimensional
/ methods
Male
Middle Aged
Multimodal Imaging
Myocardial Perfusion Imaging
/ methods
Predictive Value of Tests
Prognosis
Prospective Studies
Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted
/ methods
Reproducibility of Results
Risk Assessment
Risk Factors
Severity of Illness Index
Time Factors
Vasodilator Agents
/ administration & dosage
Cardiovascular CT
Fusion imaging
Myocardial perfusion
Vasodilator stress
Journal
The international journal of cardiovascular imaging
ISSN: 1875-8312
Titre abrégé: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 100969716
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Sep 2019
Sep 2019
Historique:
received:
08
02
2019
accepted:
30
04
2019
pubmed:
11
5
2019
medline:
3
9
2019
entrez:
11
5
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Vasodilator-stress CT perfusion imaging in addition to CT coronary angiography (CTCA) may provide a single-test alternative to nuclear stress testing, commonly used to assess hemodynamic significance of stenosis. Another alternative is fractional flow reserve (FFR) calculated from cardiac CT images. We studied the concordance between these two approaches and their relationship to outcomes. We prospectively studied 150 patients with chest pain, who underwent CTCA and regadenoson CT. CTCA images were interpreted for presence and severity of stenosis. Fused 3D displays of subendocardial X-ray attenuation with coronary arteries were created to detect stress perfusion defects (SPD) in each coronary territory. In patients with stenosis > 25%, CT-FFR was quantified. Significant stenosis was determined by: (1) combination of stenosis > 50% with an SPD, (2) CT-FFR ≤ 0.80. Patients were followed-up for 36 ± 25 months for death, myocardial infarction or revascularization. After excluding patients with normal arteries and technical/quality issues, in final analysis of 76 patients, CTCA depicted stenosis > 70% in 13/224 arteries, 50-70% in 24, and < 50% in 187. CT-FFR ≤ 0.80 was found in 41/224 arteries, and combination of SPD with > 50% stenosis in 31/224 arteries. Inter-technique agreement was 89%. Despite high incidence of abnormal CT-FFR (30/76 patients), only 7 patients experienced adverse outcomes; 6/7 also had SPDs. Only 1/9 patients with CT-FFR ≤ 0.80 but normal perfusion had an event. Fusion of CTCA and stress perfusion can help determine the hemodynamic impact of stenosis in one test, in good agreement with CT-FFR. Adding stress CT perfusion analysis may help risk-stratify patients with abnormal CT-FFR.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31073698
doi: 10.1007/s10554-019-01618-5
pii: 10.1007/s10554-019-01618-5
pmc: PMC7081838
mid: NIHMS1054918
doi:
Substances chimiques
Vasodilator Agents
0
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1733-1743Subventions
Organisme : NHLBI NIH HHS
ID : T32 HL007381
Pays : United States
Organisme : Astellas Pharma Global Development
ID : REGA-13H05
Références
Circulation. 2005 Jul 19;112(3):e47-8
pubmed: 16027263
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006 Jul 4;48(1):153-60
pubmed: 16814661
JAMA. 2006 Jul 26;296(4):403-11
pubmed: 16868298
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2007 Jul;34(7):1097-106
pubmed: 17245532
Eur Heart J. 2008 Feb;29(4):531-56
pubmed: 18084017
Radiology. 2008 Apr;247(1):49-56
pubmed: 18372464
N Engl J Med. 2008 Nov 27;359(22):2324-36
pubmed: 19038879
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2009 Jun;35(6):1078
pubmed: 19356942
Heart Rhythm. 2009 Jun;6(6):825-8
pubmed: 19467512
Eur Radiol. 2010 Feb;20(2):337-47
pubmed: 19711083
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009 Sep 15;54(12):1072-84
pubmed: 19744616
J Nucl Cardiol. 2010 Jan-Feb;17(1):27-37
pubmed: 19936863
Radiology. 2010 Feb;254(2):410-9
pubmed: 20093513
Eur Radiol. 2010 May;20(5):1174-9
pubmed: 20204639
Eur Radiol. 2010 May;20(5):1168-73
pubmed: 20333388
Invest Radiol. 2010 Jun;45(6):306-13
pubmed: 20421800
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010 Jun 22;55(25):2816-21
pubmed: 20579537
Am J Cardiol. 2010 Aug 1;106(3):310-5
pubmed: 20643238
Europace. 2011 Feb;13(2):285-6
pubmed: 20974762
Invest Radiol. 2011 May;46(5):331-40
pubmed: 21285891
J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2011 Jul-Aug;5(4):247-54
pubmed: 21723516
Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2012 Jun;28(5):1237-48
pubmed: 21800119
Eur Heart J. 2012 Jan;33(1):67-77
pubmed: 21810860
JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2011 Aug;4(8):905-16
pubmed: 21835384
Eur Heart J. 2011 Nov;32(21):2625
pubmed: 21900295
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011 Oct;197(4):829-37
pubmed: 21940569
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011 Nov 1;58(19):1989-97
pubmed: 22032711
J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2011 Nov-Dec;5(6):345-56
pubmed: 22146494
J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2011 Nov-Dec;5(6):370-81
pubmed: 22146496
J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2011 Nov-Dec;5(6):392-405
pubmed: 22146498
J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2012 Jul-Aug;36(4):443-9
pubmed: 22805675
JAMA. 2012 Sep 26;308(12):1237-45
pubmed: 22922562
JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2012 Nov;5(11):1097-111
pubmed: 23153909
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013 Mar 12;61(10):1099-107
pubmed: 23375929
Eur Radiol. 2013 Jul;23(7):1812-21
pubmed: 23430194
Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2013 Nov;6(6):881-9
pubmed: 24081777
Am J Cardiol. 2014 Jan 1;113(1):23-9
pubmed: 24238960
Am J Cardiol. 2014 Nov 1;114(9):1303-8
pubmed: 25205628
Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2015 Jan;8(1):null
pubmed: 25596143
Eur Heart J. 2016 Apr 14;37(15):1220-7
pubmed: 26763790
Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2017 Jun 1;18(6):670-680
pubmed: 27461212
Acad Radiol. 2016 Nov;23(11):1402-1411
pubmed: 27639627
Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2017 Feb;33(2):271-281
pubmed: 27718139
JAMA Cardiol. 2017 Jul 1;2(7):803-810
pubmed: 28538960
J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2017 Sep - Oct;11(5):383-388
pubmed: 28666784
J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2018 Feb 22;20(1):14
pubmed: 29471856
N Engl J Med. 1996 Jun 27;334(26):1703-8
pubmed: 8637515