Literature DB >> 28538960

Diagnostic Accuracy of Computed Tomography-Derived Fractional Flow Reserve : A Systematic Review.

Christopher M Cook1, Ricardo Petraco1, Matthew J Shun-Shin1, Yousif Ahmad1, Sukhjinder Nijjer1, Rasha Al-Lamee1, Yuetsu Kikuta1, Yasutsugu Shiono1, Jamil Mayet1, Darrel P Francis1, Sayan Sen1, Justin E Davies1.   

Abstract

Importance: Computed tomography-derived fractional flow reserve (FFR-CT) is a novel, noninvasive test for myocardial ischemia. Clinicians using FFR-CT must be able to interpret individual FFR-CT results to determine subsequent patient care. Objective: To provide clinicians a means of interpreting individual FFR-CT results with respect to the range of invasive FFRs that this interpretation might likely represent. Evidence Review: We performed a systematic review in accordance with guidelines from the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. A systematic search of MEDLINE (January 1, 2011, to 2016, week 2) and EMBASE (January 1, 2011, to 2016, week 2) was performed for studies assessing the diagnostic accuracy of FFR-CT. Title words used were computed tomography or computed tomographic and fractional flow reserve or FFR. Results were limited to publications in peer-reviewed journals. Duplicate studies and abstracts from scientific meetings were removed. All of the retrieved studies, including references, were reviewed. Findings: There were 908 vessels from 536 patients in 5 studies included in the analysis. A total of 365 (68.1%) were male, and the mean (SD) age was 63.2 (9.5) years. The overall per-vessel diagnostic accuracy of FFR-CT was 81.9% (95% CI, 79.4%-84.4%). For vessels with FFR-CT values below 0.60, 0.60 to 0.70, 0.70 to 0.80, 0.80 to 0.90, and above 0.90, diagnostic accuracy of FFR-CT was 86.4% (95% CI, 78.0%-94.0%), 74.7% (95% CI, 71.9%-77.5%), 46.1% (95% CI, 42.9%-49.3%), 87.3% (95% CI, 85.1%-89.5%), and 97.9% (95% CI, 97.9%-98.8%), respectively. The 82% (overall) diagnostic accuracy threshold was met for FFR-CT values lower than 0.63 or above 0.83. More stringent 95% and 98% diagnostic accuracy thresholds were met for FFR-CT values lower than 0.53 or above 0.93 and lower than 0.47 or above 0.99, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: The diagnostic accuracy of FFR-CT varies markedly across the spectrum of disease. This analysis allows clinicians to interpret the diagnostic accuracy of individual FFR-CT results. In combination with patient-specific factors, clinicians can use FFR-CT to judge when the cost and risk of an invasive angiogram may safely be avoided.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28538960     DOI: 10.1001/jamacardio.2017.1314

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA Cardiol            Impact factor:   14.676


  43 in total

1.  Additional diagnostic value of new CT imaging techniques for the functional assessment of coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Michèle Hamon; Damien Geindreau; Lydia Guittet; Christophe Bauters; Martial Hamon
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2019-01-07       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  Initial evaluation of three-dimensionally printed patient-specific coronary phantoms for CT-FFR software validation.

Authors:  Lauren M Shepard; Kelsey N Sommer; Erin Angel; Vijay Iyer; Michael F Wilson; Frank J Rybicki; Dimitrios Mitsouras; Sabee Molloi; Ciprian N Ionita
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2019-03-12

3.  Non-invasive fractional flow reserve derived from coronary computed tomography angiography in patients with acute chest pain: Subgroup analysis of the ROMICAT II trial.

Authors:  Maros Ferencik; Michael T Lu; Thomas Mayrhofer; Stefan B Puchner; Ting Liu; Pal Maurovich-Horvat; Khristine Ghemigian; Alexander Ivanov; Elizabeth Adami; John T Nagurney; Pamela K Woodard; Quynh A Truong; James E Udelson; Udo Hoffmann
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr       Date:  2019-05-15

4.  Computed tomography angiography-derived fractional flow reserve (CT-FFR) for the detection of myocardial ischemia with invasive fractional flow reserve as reference: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Baiyan Zhuang; Shuli Wang; Shihua Zhao; Minjie Lu
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2019-11-06       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 5.  Coronary CT Angiography Derived Fractional Flow Reserve: The Game Changer in Noninvasive Testing.

Authors:  Bjarne Linde Nørgaard; Jesper Møller Jensen; Philipp Blanke; Niels Peter Sand; Mark Rabbat; Jonathon Leipsic
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2017-09-22       Impact factor: 2.931

6.  Fusion of Three-Dimensional Echocardiographic Regional Myocardial Strain with Cardiac Computed Tomography for Noninvasive Evaluation of the Hemodynamic Impact of Coronary Stenosis in Patients with Chest Pain.

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

Review 7.  [Coronary physiology in the catheter laboratory].

Authors:  Stefan Baumann; Waldemar Bojara; Heiner Post; Tanja Rudolph; Tim Schäufele; Peter Ong; Ralf Lehmann; Constantin von Zur Mühlen
Journal:  Herz       Date:  2020-01-14       Impact factor: 1.443

Review 8.  Myocardial ischemia testing with computed tomography: emerging strategies.

Authors:  Prabhakar Rajiah; Christopher D Maroules
Journal:  Cardiovasc Diagn Ther       Date:  2017-10

9.  Hemodynamic impact of coronary stenosis using computed tomography: comparison between noninvasive fractional flow reserve and 3D fusion of coronary angiography with stress myocardial perfusion.

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

Review 10.  Debates over NICE Guideline Update: What Are the Roles of Nuclear Cardiology in the Initial Evaluation of Stable Chest Pain?

Authors:  Sang-Geon Cho; Jahae Kim; Ho-Chun Song
Journal:  Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2019-08-28
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.