Stefan Baumann1, Matthias Renker2, Svetlana Hetjens3, Stephen R Fuller4, Tobias Becher5, Dirk Loßnitzer5, Ralf Lehmann5, Ibrahim Akin5, Martin Borggrefe5, Siegfried Lang5, Julian L Wichmann6, U Joseph Schoepf7. 1. Heart & Vascular Center, Medical University of South Carolina, Ashley River Tower, 25 Courtenay Drive, Charleston, SC 29425-2260, USA; 1st Department of Medicine-Cardiology, University Medical Centre Mannheim, Mannheim, Germany and with DZHK (German Centre for Cardiovascular Research), partner site Heidelberg/Mannheim, Mannheim, Germany. 2. Heart & Vascular Center, Medical University of South Carolina, Ashley River Tower, 25 Courtenay Drive, Charleston, SC 29425-2260, USA; Kerckhoff Heart and Thorax Center, Department of Cardiology, Bad Nauheim, Germany. 3. Institute of Medical Statistics and Biometry, University Medical Centre Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany. 4. Heart & Vascular Center, Medical University of South Carolina, Ashley River Tower, 25 Courtenay Drive, Charleston, SC 29425-2260, USA. 5. 1st Department of Medicine-Cardiology, University Medical Centre Mannheim, Mannheim, Germany and with DZHK (German Centre for Cardiovascular Research), partner site Heidelberg/Mannheim, Mannheim, Germany. 6. Heart & Vascular Center, Medical University of South Carolina, Ashley River Tower, 25 Courtenay Drive, Charleston, SC 29425-2260, USA; Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany. 7. Heart & Vascular Center, Medical University of South Carolina, Ashley River Tower, 25 Courtenay Drive, Charleston, SC 29425-2260, USA. Electronic address: schoepf@musc.edu.
Abstract
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Invasive coronary angiography (ICA) with fractional flow reserve (FFR) assessment is the reference standard for the detection of hemodynamically relevant coronary lesions. We have investigated whether coronary computed tomography angiography (cCTA)-derived FFR (fractional flow reserve from coronary computed tomographic angiography [CT-FFR]) measurement improves diagnostic accuracy over cCTA. METHODS AND RESULTS: A literature search was performed for studies comparing invasive FFR, cCTA, and CT-FFR. The analysis included three prospective multicenter trials and two retrospective single-center studies; a total of 765 patients and 1306 vessels were included in the meta-analysis. Compared to invasive FFR on a per-lesion basis, CT-FFR reached a pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of 83.7% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 78.1-89.3), 74.7% (95% CI: 52.2-97.1), 64.8% (95% CI: 52.1-77.5), and 90.1% (95% CI: 80.8-99.3) compared to 84.6% (95% CI: 78.1-91.1), 49.7% (95% CI: 31.1-68.4), 39.0% (95% CI: 28.0-50.1), and 87.3% (95% CI: 72.5-100.0) for cCTA alone. In 634 vessels with intermediate stenosis (30%-70%), sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were 81.4% (95% CI: 70.4-92.9), 71.7% (95% CI: 54.5-89.0), 59.4% (95% CI: 35.5-83.4), and 89.9% (95% CI: 85.0-94.7) compared to 90.2% (95% CI: 80.6-99.9), 35.4% (95% CI: 23.5-47.3), 50.7% (95% CI: 30.6-70.8), and 82.5% (95% CI: 64.5-100.0) for cCTA alone. The summary area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of CT-FFR was superior to cCTA alone on a per-vessel (0.90 [95% CI: 0.82-0.98] vs 0.74 [95% CI: 0.63-0.86]; P = .0047) and for intermediate stenoses (0.76 [95% CI: 0.65-0.88] vs 0.57 [95% CI: 0.49-0.66]; P = .0027). CONCLUSION: CT-FFR significantly improves specificity without noticeably altering the sensitivity of cCTA with invasive FFR as a reference standard for the detection of hemodynamically relevant stenosis.
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Invasive coronary angiography (ICA) with fractional flow reserve (FFR) assessment is the reference standard for the detection of hemodynamically relevant coronary lesions. We have investigated whether coronary computed tomography angiography (cCTA)-derived FFR (fractional flow reserve from coronary computed tomographic angiography [CT-FFR]) measurement improves diagnostic accuracy over cCTA. METHODS AND RESULTS: A literature search was performed for studies comparing invasive FFR, cCTA, and CT-FFR. The analysis included three prospective multicenter trials and two retrospective single-center studies; a total of 765 patients and 1306 vessels were included in the meta-analysis. Compared to invasive FFR on a per-lesion basis, CT-FFR reached a pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of 83.7% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 78.1-89.3), 74.7% (95% CI: 52.2-97.1), 64.8% (95% CI: 52.1-77.5), and 90.1% (95% CI: 80.8-99.3) compared to 84.6% (95% CI: 78.1-91.1), 49.7% (95% CI: 31.1-68.4), 39.0% (95% CI: 28.0-50.1), and 87.3% (95% CI: 72.5-100.0) for cCTA alone. In 634 vessels with intermediate stenosis (30%-70%), sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were 81.4% (95% CI: 70.4-92.9), 71.7% (95% CI: 54.5-89.0), 59.4% (95% CI: 35.5-83.4), and 89.9% (95% CI: 85.0-94.7) compared to 90.2% (95% CI: 80.6-99.9), 35.4% (95% CI: 23.5-47.3), 50.7% (95% CI: 30.6-70.8), and 82.5% (95% CI: 64.5-100.0) for cCTA alone. The summary area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of CT-FFR was superior to cCTA alone on a per-vessel (0.90 [95% CI: 0.82-0.98] vs 0.74 [95% CI: 0.63-0.86]; P = .0047) and for intermediate stenoses (0.76 [95% CI: 0.65-0.88] vs 0.57 [95% CI: 0.49-0.66]; P = .0027). CONCLUSION: CT-FFR significantly improves specificity without noticeably altering the sensitivity of cCTA with invasive FFR as a reference standard for the detection of hemodynamically relevant stenosis.
Authors: Victor Mor-Avi; Mita B Patel; Francesco Maffessanti; Amita Singh; Diego Medvedofsky; S Javed Zaidi; Anuj Mediratta; Akhil Narang; Noreen Nazir; Nadjia Kachenoura; Roberto M Lang; Amit R Patel Journal: J Am Soc Echocardiogr Date: 2018-03-22 Impact factor: 5.251
Authors: Amit R Patel; Francesco Maffessanti; Mita B Patel; Kalie Kebed; Akhil Narang; Amita Singh; Diego Medvedofsky; S Javed Zaidi; Anuj Mediratta; Neha Goyal; Nadjia Kachenoura; Roberto M Lang; Victor Mor-Avi Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2019-05-09 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Dirk Lossnitzer; Leonard Chandra; Marlon Rutsch; Tobias Becher; Daniel Overhoff; Sonja Janssen; Christel Weiss; Martin Borggrefe; Ibrahim Akin; Stefan Pfleger; Stefan Baumann Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2020-03-03 Impact factor: 4.241
Authors: Dirk Lossnitzer; Selina Klenantz; Florian Andre; Johannes Goerich; U Joseph Schoepf; Kyle L Pazzo; Andre Sommer; Matthias Brado; Friedemann Gückel; Roman Sokiranski; Tobias Becher; Ibrahim Akin; Sebastian J Buss; Stefan Baumann Journal: BMC Cardiovasc Disord Date: 2022-02-05 Impact factor: 2.298