Niels Peter Rønnow Sand1, Karsten Tange Veien2, Søren Steen Nielsen3, Bjarne Linde Nørgaard4, Pia Larsen5, Allan Johansen6, Søren Hess7, Lone Deibjerg8, Majed Husain8, Anders Junker2, Kristian Korsgaard Thomsen8, Allan Rohold8, Lisette Okkels Jensen2. 1. Department of Cardiology, Hospital of Southwest Denmark, Esbjerg, Denmark; Institute of Regional Health Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark. Electronic address: npsand@webspeed.dk. 2. Department of Cardiology, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark. 3. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark. 4. Department of Cardiology, Aarhus University Hospital, Skejby, Aarhus, Denmark. 5. Department of Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark. 6. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark. 7. Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Hospital of Southwest Denmark, Esbjerg, Denmark. 8. Department of Cardiology, Hospital of Southwest Denmark, Esbjerg, Denmark.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study sought to compare the per-patient diagnostic performance of coronary computed tomography angiography (CTA)-derived fractional flow reserve (FFRCT) with that of single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), using a fractional flow reserve (FFR) value of ≤0.80 as the reference for diagnosing at least 1 hemodynamically significant stenosis in a head-to-head comparison of patients with intermediate coronary stenosis as determined by coronary CTA. BACKGROUND: No previous study has prospectively compared the diagnostic performance of FFRCT and myocardial perfusion imaging by SPECT in symptomatic patients with intermediate range coronary artery disease (CAD). METHODS: This study was conducted at a single-center as a prospective study in patients with stable angina pectoris (N = 143). FFRCT and SPECT analyses were performed by core laboratories and were blinded for the personnel responsible for downstream patient management. FFRCT ≤0.80 distally in at least 1 coronary artery with a diameter ≥2 mm classified patients as having ischemia. Ischemia by SPECT was encountered if a reversible perfusion defect (summed difference score ≥2) or transitory ischemic dilation of the left ventricle (ratio >1.19) were found. RESULTS: The per-patient diagnostic performance for identifying ischemia (95% confidence interval [CI]), FFRCT versus SPECT, were sensitivity of 91% (95% CI: 81% to 97%) versus 41% (95% CI: 29% to 55%; p < 0.001); specificity of 55% (95% CI: 44% to 66%) versus 86% (95% CI: 77% to 93%; p < 0.001); negative predictive value of 90% (95% CI: 82% to 98%) versus 68% (95% CI: 59% to 77%; p = 0.001); positive predictive value of 58% (95% CI: 48% to 68%) versus 67% (95% CI: 51% to 82%; p = NS); and accuracy of 70% (95% CI: 62% to 77%) versus 68% (95% CI: 60% to 75%; p = NS) respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with stable chest pain and CAD as determined by coronary CTA, the overall diagnostic accuracy levels of FFRCT and SPECT were identical in assessing hemodynamically significant stenosis. However, FFRCT demonstrated a significantly higher diagnostic sensitivity than SPECT.
OBJECTIVES: This study sought to compare the per-patient diagnostic performance of coronary computed tomography angiography (CTA)-derived fractional flow reserve (FFRCT) with that of single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), using a fractional flow reserve (FFR) value of ≤0.80 as the reference for diagnosing at least 1 hemodynamically significant stenosis in a head-to-head comparison of patients with intermediate coronary stenosis as determined by coronary CTA. BACKGROUND: No previous study has prospectively compared the diagnostic performance of FFRCT and myocardial perfusion imaging by SPECT in symptomatic patients with intermediate range coronary artery disease (CAD). METHODS: This study was conducted at a single-center as a prospective study in patients with stable angina pectoris (N = 143). FFRCT and SPECT analyses were performed by core laboratories and were blinded for the personnel responsible for downstream patient management. FFRCT ≤0.80 distally in at least 1 coronary artery with a diameter ≥2 mm classified patients as having ischemia. Ischemia by SPECT was encountered if a reversible perfusion defect (summed difference score ≥2) or transitory ischemic dilation of the left ventricle (ratio >1.19) were found. RESULTS: The per-patient diagnostic performance for identifying ischemia (95% confidence interval [CI]), FFRCT versus SPECT, were sensitivity of 91% (95% CI: 81% to 97%) versus 41% (95% CI: 29% to 55%; p < 0.001); specificity of 55% (95% CI: 44% to 66%) versus 86% (95% CI: 77% to 93%; p < 0.001); negative predictive value of 90% (95% CI: 82% to 98%) versus 68% (95% CI: 59% to 77%; p = 0.001); positive predictive value of 58% (95% CI: 48% to 68%) versus 67% (95% CI: 51% to 82%; p = NS); and accuracy of 70% (95% CI: 62% to 77%) versus 68% (95% CI: 60% to 75%; p = NS) respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with stable chest pain and CAD as determined by coronary CTA, the overall diagnostic accuracy levels of FFRCT and SPECT were identical in assessing hemodynamically significant stenosis. However, FFRCT demonstrated a significantly higher diagnostic sensitivity than SPECT.
Authors: Simon S Martin; Domenico Mastrodicasa; Marly van Assen; Carlo N De Cecco; Richard R Bayer; Christian Tesche; Akos Varga-Szemes; Andreas M Fischer; Brian E Jacobs; Pooyan Sahbaee; L Parkwood Griffith; Andrew J Matuskowitz; Thomas J Vogl; U Joseph Schoepf Journal: Radiol Cardiothorac Imaging Date: 2020-06-25
Authors: Gianluca Pontone; Alexia Rossi; Marco Guglielmo; Marc R Dweck; Oliver Gaemperli; Koen Nieman; Francesca Pugliese; Pal Maurovich-Horvat; Alessia Gimelli; Bernard Cosyns; Stephan Achenbach Journal: Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2022-03-22 Impact factor: 9.130
Authors: Jagat Narula; Y Chandrashekhar; Amir Ahmadi; Suhny Abbara; Daniel S Berman; Ron Blankstein; Jonathon Leipsic; David Newby; Edward D Nicol; Koen Nieman; Leslee Shaw; Todd C Villines; Michelle Williams; Harvey S Hecht Journal: J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr Date: 2020-11-20