Nobuo Tomizawa1, Kodai Yamamoto2, Shinichi Inoh2, Takeshi Nojo2, Sunao Nakamura3. 1. Department of Radiology, New Tokyo Hospital, 1271 Wanagaya, Matsudo, Chiba 270-2232, Japan. Electronic address: tomizawa-tky@umin.ac.jp. 2. Department of Radiology, New Tokyo Hospital, 1271 Wanagaya, Matsudo, Chiba 270-2232, Japan. 3. Department of Cardiology, New Tokyo Hospital, 1271 Wanagaya, Matsudo, Chiba 270-2232, Japan.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the diagnostic performance of estimated energy loss (EEL) with diameter stenosis (DS) to estimate significant stenosis by fractional flow reserve (FFR). MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred twenty-five patients were included. EEL was calculated using DS, lesion length, minimal lumen area and left ventricular volume. FFR ≤ 0.80 was determined significant. RESULTS: EEL improved the accuracy from 63% (95% confidence interval (CI): 55-72%) to 83% (95% CI: 75-89%, p < 0.0001). EEL increased the area under the receiver operating characteristics curve from 0.63 to 0.85 (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: EEL improved the diagnostic performance to detect functionally significant stenosis than DS.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the diagnostic performance of estimated energy loss (EEL) with diameter stenosis (DS) to estimate significant stenosis by fractional flow reserve (FFR). MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred twenty-five patients were included. EEL was calculated using DS, lesion length, minimal lumen area and left ventricular volume. FFR ≤ 0.80 was determined significant. RESULTS: EEL improved the accuracy from 63% (95% confidence interval (CI): 55-72%) to 83% (95% CI: 75-89%, p < 0.0001). EEL increased the area under the receiver operating characteristics curve from 0.63 to 0.85 (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: EEL improved the diagnostic performance to detect functionally significant stenosis than DS.