Kimihiko Hirose1, Taishiro Chikamori2, Satoshi Hida1, Nobuhiro Tanaka3, Jun Yamashita1, Yuko Igarashi1, Tetsushi Saitoh1, Hirokazu Tanaka4, Akira Yamashina1. 1. Department of Cardiology, Tokyo Medical University, Tokyo, Japan. 2. Department of Cardiology, Tokyo Medical University, Tokyo, Japan. Electronic address: chikamd@tokyo-med.ac.jp. 3. Department of Cardiology, Tokyo Medical University Hachioji Medical Center, Tokyo, Japan. 4. Department of Cardiology, Tokyo Medical University Ibaraki Medical Center, Tokyo, Japan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although fractional flow reserve (FFR) measurements during coronary angiography are performed in routine clinical practice, few studies have evaluated FFR measurements in dialysis patients. METHODS: We retrospectively studied 42 hemodialysis patients with suspected or known coronary artery disease (CAD) who underwent stress myocardial perfusion imaging and coronary angiography with FFR measurements for 61 coronary lesions. The cut-off value for FFR to detect myocardial ischemia was determined by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. RESULTS: There were 61 coronary vessels measured by FFR. The FFR range was 0.34-0.93 with a mean of 0.74±0.13. The ROC curve analysis revealed that the best cut-off value of FFR for detecting myocardial ischemia was 0.76 (p<0.0001), with 70% sensitivity, 86% specificity, and 76% accuracy for myocardial ischemia. Compared with patients who had positive myocardial ischemia and an FFR≤0.76, those who had negative myocardial ischemia despite an FFR≤0.76 had less left ventricular (LV) mass index, whereas patients who had positive myocardial ischemia despite an FFR>0.76 had greater LV mass indexor serum calcium-phosphorus product. CONCLUSIONS: The cut-off value of FFR for myocardial ischemia in chronic hemodialysis patients is similar to that in other CAD patients. However, caution is necessary when FFR measurements are applied to dialysis patients with significantly increased LV mass index or serum calcium-phosphorus product.
BACKGROUND: Although fractional flow reserve (FFR) measurements during coronary angiography are performed in routine clinical practice, few studies have evaluated FFR measurements in dialysis patients. METHODS: We retrospectively studied 42 hemodialysis patients with suspected or known coronary artery disease (CAD) who underwent stress myocardial perfusion imaging and coronary angiography with FFR measurements for 61 coronary lesions. The cut-off value for FFR to detect myocardial ischemia was determined by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. RESULTS: There were 61 coronary vessels measured by FFR. The FFR range was 0.34-0.93 with a mean of 0.74±0.13. The ROC curve analysis revealed that the best cut-off value of FFR for detecting myocardial ischemia was 0.76 (p<0.0001), with 70% sensitivity, 86% specificity, and 76% accuracy for myocardial ischemia. Compared with patients who had positive myocardial ischemia and an FFR≤0.76, those who had negative myocardial ischemia despite an FFR≤0.76 had less left ventricular (LV) mass index, whereas patients who had positive myocardial ischemia despite an FFR>0.76 had greater LV mass indexor serum calcium-phosphorus product. CONCLUSIONS: The cut-off value of FFR for myocardial ischemia in chronic hemodialysis patients is similar to that in other CAD patients. However, caution is necessary when FFR measurements are applied to dialysis patients with significantly increased LV mass index or serum calcium-phosphorus product.
Authors: Tomas Kovarnik; Matsuo Hitoshi; Ales Kral; Stepan Jerabek; David Zemanek; Yoshiaki Kawase; Hiroyuki Omori; Toru Tanigaki; Jan Pudil; Alexandra Vodzinska; Marian Branny; Roman Stipal; Petr Kala; Jan Mrozek; Martin Porzer; Tomas Grezl; Kamil Novobilsky; Oscar Mendiz; Karel Kopriva; Martin Mates; Martin Chval; Zhi Chen; Pavel Martasek; Ales Linhart Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2022-05-03 Impact factor: 6.106
Authors: Alejandro Travieso; Alex Fernando Castro-Mejia; Adrian Jeronimo-Baza; Maria Jose Perez-Vizcayno; Hernan Mejia-Renteria; Fernando Macaya; Gabriela Tirado-Conte; Luis Nombela; Pilar Jimenez-Quevedo; Pablo Salinas; Ivan J Nunez-Gil; Antonio Fernandez-Ortiz; Javier Escaned; Nieves Gonzalo Journal: Cardiol J Date: 2021-04-12 Impact factor: 3.487