AIMS: Reporting of quantitative myocardial blood flow (MBF) is typically performed in standard coronary territories. However, coronary anatomy and myocardial vascular territories vary among individuals, and a coronary artery may erroneously be deemed stenosed or not if territorial demarcation is incorrect. So far, the diagnostic consequences of calculating individually vs. standardly assessed MBF values have not been reported. We examined whether individual reassignment of vascular territories would improve the diagnostic accuracy of MBF with regard to the detection of significant coronary artery disease (CAD). METHODS AND RESULTS: Forty-four patients with suspected CAD were included prospectively and underwent coronary CT-angiography and quantitative MBF assessment with O-15-water PET followed by invasive, quantitative coronary angiography, which served as reference. MBF was calculated in the vascular territories during adenosine stress according to a standardized 17-segment American Heart Association model and an individualized model, using CT-angiography to adjust the coronary territories to their feeding vessels. Individually defined territories deviated from standard territories in 52% of patients. However, MBF in the three coronary territories defined by standard and individualized models did not differ significantly, except in one patient, in whom the MBF of an individualized coronary territory deviated sufficiently as to change the test from a false positive to a true negative result in this particular territory. CONCLUSION: Disparity between standardized and individualized vascular territories was present in half of the patients, but had little clinical impact. Still, caution should be taken not always to rely on standard territories, as this may at times cause misinterpretation. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.
AIMS: Reporting of quantitative myocardial blood flow (MBF) is typically performed in standard coronary territories. However, coronary anatomy and myocardial vascular territories vary among individuals, and a coronary artery may erroneously be deemed stenosed or not if territorial demarcation is incorrect. So far, the diagnostic consequences of calculating individually vs. standardly assessed MBF values have not been reported. We examined whether individual reassignment of vascular territories would improve the diagnostic accuracy of MBF with regard to the detection of significant coronary artery disease (CAD). METHODS AND RESULTS: Forty-four patients with suspected CAD were included prospectively and underwent coronary CT-angiography and quantitative MBF assessment with O-15-water PET followed by invasive, quantitative coronary angiography, which served as reference. MBF was calculated in the vascular territories during adenosine stress according to a standardized 17-segment American Heart Association model and an individualized model, using CT-angiography to adjust the coronary territories to their feeding vessels. Individually defined territories deviated from standard territories in 52% of patients. However, MBF in the three coronary territories defined by standard and individualized models did not differ significantly, except in one patient, in whom the MBF of an individualized coronary territory deviated sufficiently as to change the test from a false positive to a true negative result in this particular territory. CONCLUSION: Disparity between standardized and individualized vascular territories was present in half of the patients, but had little clinical impact. Still, caution should be taken not always to rely on standard territories, as this may at times cause misinterpretation. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.
Authors: Anders Thomassen; Poul-Erik Braad; Kasper T Pedersen; Henrik Petersen; Allan Johansen; Axel C P Diederichsen; Hans Mickley; Lisette O Jensen; Juhani Knuuti; Oke Gerke; Poul F Høilund-Carlsen Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2018-07-31 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Emmeli F R Mikkelsen; Christian Østergaard Mariager; Thomas Nørlinger; Haiyun Qi; Rolf F Schulte; Steen Jakobsen; Jørgen Frøkiær; Michael Pedersen; Hans Stødkilde-Jørgensen; Christoffer Laustsen Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2017-11-22 Impact factor: 4.379