OBJECTIVES: We sought to perform a direct comparison between perfusion scintigraphic results and intracoronary-derived hemodynamic variables (fractional flow reserve [FFR]; absolute and relative coronary flow velocity reserve [CFVR and rCFVR, respectively]) in patients with two-vessel disease. BACKGROUND: There is limited information on the diagnostic accuracy of intracoronary-derived variables (CFVR, FFR and rCFVR) in patients with multivessel disease. METHODS: Dipyridamole technetium-99m sestamibi (MIBI) single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) was performed in 127 patients. The presence of reversible perfusion defects in the region of interest was determined. Within one week, angiography was performed; CFVR, rCFVR and FFR were determined in 161 coronary lesions after intracoronary administration of adenosine. The predictive value for the presence of reversible perfusion defects on MIBI SPECT of CFVR, rCFVR and FFR was evaluated by the area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristics curves. RESULTS: The mean percentage diameter stenosis was 57% (range 35% to 85%), as measured by quantitative coronary angiography. Using per-patient analysis, the AUCs for CFVR (0.70 +/- 0.052), rCFVR (0.72 +/- 0.051) and FFR (0.76 +/- 0.050) were not significantly different (p = NS). The percentages of agreement with the results of MIBI SPECT were 76%, 78% and 77% for CFVR, rCFVR and FFR, respectively. Per-lesion analysis, using all 161 measured lesions, yielded similar results. CONCLUSIONS: The diagnostic accuracy of three intracoronary-derived hemodynamic variables, as compared with the results of perfusion scintigraphy, is similar in patients with two-vessel coronary artery disease. Cut-offvalues of 2.0 for CFVR, 0.65 for rCFVR and 0.75 for FFR can be used for clinical decision-making in this patient cohort. Discordant results were obtained in 23% of the cases that require prospective evaluation for appropriate patient management.
OBJECTIVES: We sought to perform a direct comparison between perfusion scintigraphic results and intracoronary-derived hemodynamic variables (fractional flow reserve [FFR]; absolute and relative coronary flow velocity reserve [CFVR and rCFVR, respectively]) in patients with two-vessel disease. BACKGROUND: There is limited information on the diagnostic accuracy of intracoronary-derived variables (CFVR, FFR and rCFVR) in patients with multivessel disease. METHODS:Dipyridamole technetium-99m sestamibi (MIBI) single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) was performed in 127 patients. The presence of reversible perfusion defects in the region of interest was determined. Within one week, angiography was performed; CFVR, rCFVR and FFR were determined in 161 coronary lesions after intracoronary administration of adenosine. The predictive value for the presence of reversible perfusion defects on MIBI SPECT of CFVR, rCFVR and FFR was evaluated by the area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristics curves. RESULTS: The mean percentage diameter stenosis was 57% (range 35% to 85%), as measured by quantitative coronary angiography. Using per-patient analysis, the AUCs for CFVR (0.70 +/- 0.052), rCFVR (0.72 +/- 0.051) and FFR (0.76 +/- 0.050) were not significantly different (p = NS). The percentages of agreement with the results of MIBI SPECT were 76%, 78% and 77% for CFVR, rCFVR and FFR, respectively. Per-lesion analysis, using all 161 measured lesions, yielded similar results. CONCLUSIONS: The diagnostic accuracy of three intracoronary-derived hemodynamic variables, as compared with the results of perfusion scintigraphy, is similar in patients with two-vessel coronary artery disease. Cut-offvalues of 2.0 for CFVR, 0.65 for rCFVR and 0.75 for FFR can be used for clinical decision-making in this patient cohort. Discordant results were obtained in 23% of the cases that require prospective evaluation for appropriate patient management.
Authors: Robert A Leonardi; Jacob C Townsend; Chetan A Patel; Bethany J Wolf; Thomas M Todoran; Valerian L Fernandes; Christopher D Nielsen; Daniel H Steinberg; Eric R Powers Journal: Cardiovasc Revasc Med Date: 2013-07-23
Authors: Marcus Hacker; Johannes Rieber; Rupert Schmid; Christian Lafougere; Andreas Tausig; Karl Theisen; Volker Klaus; Reinhold Tiling Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2005 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Ziad A Ali; Keyvan Karimi Galougahi; Tamim Nazif; Akiko Maehara; Mark A Hardy; David J Cohen; Lloyd E Ratner; Michael B Collins; Jeffrey W Moses; Ajay J Kirtane; Gregg W Stone; Dimitri Karmpaliotis; Martin B Leon Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2016-03-07 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: I Erhard; J Rieber; P Jung; M Hacker; T Schiele; H-U Stempfle; A König; M Baylacher; K Theisen; U Siebert; V Klauss Journal: Z Kardiol Date: 2005-05
Authors: Stefan Förster; Johannes Rieber; Christopher Ubleis; Mayo Weiss; Peter Bartenstein; Paul Cumming; Volker Klauss; Marcus Hacker Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2009-09-16 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Steven A J Chamuleau; Berthe L F van Eck-Smit; Martijn Meuwissen; Jan J Piek Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2002-02 Impact factor: 2.357