Are baseline conditions of coronary arteries sufficient for calculating angio-based index of microcirculatory resistance and fractional flow reserve?

冠状动脉的基线条件是否足以计算基于血管造影的微循环阻力指数和血流储备分数?

阅读:1

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Angio-based index of microcirculatory resistance (IMR) and fractional flow reserve (FFR) have been developed, however, the differences between baseline and hyperemic data and their effects on their computation have not yet been discussed. This study aimed to compare the diagnostic performance of a novel method for calculating IMR and FFR from coronary angiography under baseline and hyperemic conditions. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study to investigate the diagnostic performance of angiography-derived IMR (AccuIMR) and FFR (AccuFFRangio) computed from the hyperemic condition (AccuIMR(hyp), AccuFFRangio(hyp)) and baseline condition (AccuIMR(base), AccuFFRangio(base)) in 101 consecutive patients with chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) who underwent measurements of IMR and FFR at a single center, using wire-based IMR and FFR as the reference standard. RESULTS: AccuIMR(hyp) showed much better correlation with IMR than AccuIMR(base) (r=0.77 vs. 0.47, P<0.001). The diagnostic accuracy and area under the curve (AUC) for identifying significant microvascular dysfunction was higher for AccuIMR(hyp) than AccuIMR(base) [92.1% (95% CI: 85.0-96.5%) vs. 83.2% (95% CI: 74.4-89.9%), P=0.012; 0.942 (95% CI: 0.877-0.979) vs. 0.815 (95% CI: 0.726-0.886), P=0.003]. The computed AccuFFRangio showed good correlations with FFR and good diagnostic performance under both hyperemic and baseline conditions [r=0.68 vs. 0.68, P>0.99; diagnostic accuracy =95.9% (95% CI: 89.8-98.9%) vs. 94.9% (95% CI: 88.4-98.3%), P=0.728; AUC =0.989 (95% CI: 0.942-1.000) vs. 0.973 (95% CI: 0.919-0.995), P=0.381]. The net reclassification index (NRI) demonstrated that hyperemic group had improved reclassification ability compared to the baseline group in identification of IMR >25 (NRI =0.20, P<0.001) and FFR ≤0.8 (NRI =0.11, P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: By comparing the calculated angio-derived IMR and FFR under the baseline and hyperemic conditions, this study demonstrates that AccuIMR calculation is more accurate using the hyperemic condition, while AccuFFRangio calculation is accurate under both conditions.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。