Literature DB >> 27022460

Clinical outcomes of combined flow-pressure drop measurements using newly developed diagnostic endpoint: Pressure drop coefficient in patients with coronary artery dysfunction.

Mohamed A Effat1, Srikara Viswanath Peelukhana1, Rupak K Banerjee1.   

Abstract

AIM: To combine pressure and flow parameter, pressure drop coefficient (CDP) will result in better clinical outcomes in comparison to the fractional flow reserve (FFR) group.
METHODS: To test this hypothesis, a comparison was made between the FFR < 0.75 and CDP > 27.9 groups in this study, for the major adverse cardiac events [major adverse cardiac events (MACE): Primary outcome] and patients' quality of life (secondary outcome). Further, a comparison was also made between the survival curves for the FFR < 0.75 and CDP > 27.9 groups. Two-tailed χ (2) test proportions were performed for the comparison of primary and secondary outcomes. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was performed to compare the survival curves of FFR < 0.75 and CDP > 27.9 groups (MedcalcV10.2, Mariakerke, Belgium). Results were considered statistically significant for P < 0.05.
RESULTS: The primary outcomes (%MACE) in the FFR < 0.75 group (20%, 4 out of 20) was not statistically different (P = 0.24) from the %MACE occurring in CDP > 27.9 group (8.57%, 2 out of 35). Noteworthy is the reduction in the %MACE in the CDP > 27.9 group, in comparison to the FFR < 0.75 group. Further, the secondary outcomes were not statistically significant between the FFR < 0.75 and CDP > 27.9 groups. Survival analysis results suggest that the survival time for the CDP > 27.9 group (n = 35) is significantly higher (P = 0.048) in comparison to the survival time for the FFR < 0.75 group (n = 20). The results remained similar for a FFR = 0.80 cut-off.
CONCLUSION: Based on the above, CDP could prove to be a better diagnostic end-point for clinical revascularization decision-making in the cardiac catheterization laboratories.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Intermediate coronary stenosis; Interventional cardiology; Pressure drop coefficient

Year:  2016        PMID: 27022460      PMCID: PMC4807317          DOI: 10.4330/wjc.v8.i3.283

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World J Cardiol


  32 in total

1.  Fractional flow reserve versus angiography for guiding percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease: 2-year follow-up of the FAME (Fractional Flow Reserve Versus Angiography for Multivessel Evaluation) study.

Authors:  Nico H J Pijls; William F Fearon; Pim A L Tonino; Uwe Siebert; Fumiaki Ikeno; Bernhard Bornschein; Marcel van't Veer; Volker Klauss; Ganesh Manoharan; Thomas Engstrøm; Keith G Oldroyd; Peter N Ver Lee; Philip A MacCarthy; Bernard De Bruyne
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2010-05-28       Impact factor: 24.094

2.  Effect of heart rate on hemodynamic endpoints under concomitant microvascular disease in a porcine model.

Authors:  S V Peelukhana; R K Banerjee; K K Kolli; M A Effat; T A Helmy; M A Leesar; E W Schneeberger; P Succop; W Gottliebson; A Irif
Journal:  Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol       Date:  2012-01-27       Impact factor: 4.733

3.  Physiological assessment of coronary artery disease in the cardiac catheterization laboratory: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association Committee on Diagnostic and Interventional Cardiac Catheterization, Council on Clinical Cardiology.

Authors:  Morton J Kern; Amir Lerman; Jan-Willen Bech; Bernard De Bruyne; Eric Eeckhout; William F Fearon; Stuart T Higano; Michael J Lim; Martijn Meuwissen; Jan J Piek; Nico H J Pijls; Maria Siebes; Jos A E Spaan
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2006-08-28       Impact factor: 29.690

4.  Effect of changes in contractility on pressure drop coefficient and fractional flow reserve in a porcine model.

Authors:  Kranthi K Kolli; R K Banerjee; Srikara V Peelukhana; M A Effat; M A Leesar; Imran Arif; E W Schneeberger; Paul Succop; W M Gottliebson; Tarek A Helmy
Journal:  J Invasive Cardiol       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 2.022

5.  Angiographic versus functional severity of coronary artery stenoses in the FAME study fractional flow reserve versus angiography in multivessel evaluation.

Authors:  Pim A L Tonino; William F Fearon; Bernard De Bruyne; Keith G Oldroyd; Massoud A Leesar; Peter N Ver Lee; Philip A Maccarthy; Marcel Van't Veer; Nico H J Pijls
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2010-06-22       Impact factor: 24.094

6.  Diagnostic cutoff for pressure drop coefficient in relation to fractional flow reserve and coronary flow reserve: A patient-level analysis.

Authors:  Kranthi K Kolli; Tim P van de Hoef; Mohamed A Effat; Rupak K Banerjee; Srikara V Peelukhana; Paul Succop; Massoud A Leesar; Arif Imran; Jan J Piek; Tarek A Helmy
Journal:  Catheter Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2015-10-01       Impact factor: 2.692

7.  Diagnostic accuracy of combined intracoronary pressure and flow velocity information during baseline conditions: adenosine-free assessment of functional coronary lesion severity.

Authors:  Tim P van de Hoef; Froukje Nolte; Peter Damman; Ronak Delewi; Matthijs Bax; Steven A J Chamuleau; Michiel Voskuil; Maria Siebes; Jan G P Tijssen; Jos A E Spaan; Jan J Piek; Martijn Meuwissen
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2012-07-10       Impact factor: 6.546

8.  Characterizing momentum change and viscous loss of a hemodynamic endpoint in assessment of coronary lesions.

Authors:  Rupak K Banerjee; Abhijit Sinha Roy; Lloyd H Back; Martin R Back; Saeb F Khoury; Ronald W Millard
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2006-03-10       Impact factor: 2.712

9.  Hyperemic stenosis resistance index for evaluation of functional coronary lesion severity.

Authors:  Martijn Meuwissen; Maria Siebes; Steven A J Chamuleau; Berthe L F van Eck-Smit; Karel T Koch; Robbert J de Winter; Jan G P Tijssen; Jos A E Spaan; Jan J Piek
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2002-07-23       Impact factor: 29.690

10.  Guidelines for percutaneous coronary interventions. The Task Force for Percutaneous Coronary Interventions of the European Society of Cardiology.

Authors:  Sigmund Silber; Per Albertsson; Francisco F Avilés; Paolo G Camici; Antonio Colombo; Christian Hamm; Erik Jørgensen; Jean Marco; Jan-Erik Nordrehaug; Witold Ruzyllo; Philip Urban; Gregg W Stone; William Wijns
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2005-03-15       Impact factor: 29.983

View more
  3 in total

1.  Delineation of epicardial stenosis in patients with microvascular disease using pressure drop coefficient: A pilot outcome study.

Authors:  Ullhas Udaya Hebbar; Mohamed A Effat; Srikara V Peelukhana; Imran Arif; Rupak K Banerjee
Journal:  World J Cardiol       Date:  2017-12-26

2.  Correction to "Clinical outcomes of combined flow-pressure drop measurements using newly developed diagnostic endpoint: Pressure drop coefficient in patients with coronary artery dysfunction".

Authors:  Mohamed A Effat; Srikara Viswanath Peelukhana; Rupak K Banerjee
Journal:  World J Cardiol       Date:  2018-07-26

3.  Comparison Between 5- and 1-Year Outcomes Using Cutoff Values of Pressure Drop Coefficient and Fractional Flow Reserve for Diagnosing Coronary Artery Diseases.

Authors:  Rupak K Banerjee; Sruthi Ramadurai; Shreyash M Manegaonkar; Marepalli B Rao; Sathyaprabha Rakkimuthu; Mohamed A Effat
Journal:  Front Physiol       Date:  2021-07-14       Impact factor: 4.566

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.