Literature DB >> 30604558

Application of the DILEMMA score to improve lesion selection for invasive physiological assessment.

Michael Michail1,2, Hakim-Moulay Dehbi3, Nitesh Nerlekar1, Justin E Davies4, Andrew S P Sharp5, Suneel Talwar6, James D Cameron1, Adam J Brown1, Dennis T Wong1, Anthony Mathur7, Alun D Hughes2, Om Narayan1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: We sought to assess the validity of the DILEMMA score against instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) and evaluate its utility in rationalizing the number of patients referred for invasive physiological assessment.
BACKGROUND: The DILEMMA score is a validated angiographic scoring tool incorporating minimal lumen diameter, lesion length and subtended myocardial area that has been shown to predict the functional significance of lesions as assessed by fractional flow reserve (FFR).
METHODS: Patients in the DEFINE-FLAIR study who had coronary stenosis of intermediate severity were randomized to either FFR or iFR. DILEMMA score was calculated retrospectively on a subset of this cohort by operators blinded to FFR or iFR values.
RESULTS: Three hundred and forty-six lesions (181 assessed by FFR; 165 by iFR) from 259 patients (mean age 66.0 years, 79% male) were included. A DILEMMA score ≤ 2 had a negative predictive value of 96.3% and 95.7% for identifying lesions with FFR >0.80 and iFR >0.89, respectively. A DILEMMA score ≥ 9 had a positive predictive value of 88.9% and 100% for identifying lesions with FFR ≤0.80 and iFR ≤0.89, respectively. The receiver operating characteristic area under the curve values for DILEMMA score to predict FFR ≤0.80 and iFR ≤0.89 were 0.83 (95% CI 0.77-0.90) and 0.82 (0.75-0.89) respectively. A DILEMMA score ≤ 2 or ≥9 occurred in 172 of the 346 lesions (49.7%).
CONCLUSIONS: Using DILEMMA score in patients with coronary stenosis of intermediate severity may reduce the need for pressure wire use, offering potential cost-savings and minimizing the risks associated with invasive physiological lesion assessment.
© 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  angiography, coronary; coronary artery disease; coronary blood flow/physiology/microvascular function; fractional flow reserve; percutaneous coronary intervention

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30604558      PMCID: PMC6824904          DOI: 10.1002/ccd.28054

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Catheter Cardiovasc Interv        ISSN: 1522-1946            Impact factor:   2.692


  19 in total

1.  Pressure drop across artificially induced stenoses in the femoral arteries of dogs.

Authors:  D F Young; N R Cholvin; A C Roth
Journal:  Circ Res       Date:  1975-06       Impact factor: 17.367

2.  2018 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization.

Authors:  Franz-Josef Neumann; Miguel Sousa-Uva; Anders Ahlsson; Fernando Alfonso; Adrian P Banning; Umberto Benedetto; Robert A Byrne; Jean-Philippe Collet; Volkmar Falk; Stuart J Head; Peter Jüni; Adnan Kastrati; Akos Koller; Steen D Kristensen; Josef Niebauer; Dimitrios J Richter; Petar M Seferovic; Dirk Sibbing; Giulio G Stefanini; Stephan Windecker; Rashmi Yadav; Michael O Zembala
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2019-01-07       Impact factor: 29.983

3.  Effect of lesion length on fractional flow reserve in intermediate coronary lesions.

Authors:  David Brosh; Stuart T Higano; Ryan J Lennon; David R Holmes; Amir Lerman
Journal:  Am Heart J       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 4.749

4.  Angiographic versus functional severity of coronary artery stenoses in the FAME study fractional flow reserve versus angiography in multivessel evaluation.

Authors:  Pim A L Tonino; William F Fearon; Bernard De Bruyne; Keith G Oldroyd; Massoud A Leesar; Peter N Ver Lee; Philip A Maccarthy; Marcel Van't Veer; Nico H J Pijls
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2010-06-22       Impact factor: 24.094

5.  Visual and Quantitative Assessment of Coronary Stenoses at Angiography Versus Fractional Flow Reserve: The Impact of Risk Factors.

Authors:  Julien Adjedj; Panagiotis Xaplanteris; Gabor Toth; Angela Ferrara; Mariano Pellicano; Giovanni Ciccarelli; Vincent Floré; Emanuele Barbato; Bernard De Bruyne
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 7.792

6.  Comparison of clinical interpretation with visual assessment and quantitative coronary angiography in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention in contemporary practice: the Assessing Angiography (A2) project.

Authors:  Brahmajee K Nallamothu; John A Spertus; Alexandra J Lansky; David J Cohen; Philip G Jones; Faraz Kureshi; Gregory J Dehmer; Joseph P Drozda; Mary Norine Walsh; John E Brush; Gerald C Koenig; Thad F Waites; D Scott Gantt; George Kichura; Richard A Chazal; Peter K O'Brien; C Michael Valentine; John S Rumsfeld; Johan H C Reiber; Joann G Elmore; Richard A Krumholz; W Douglas Weaver; Harlan M Krumholz
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2013-03-07       Impact factor: 29.690

7.  Impact of lesion length on functional significance in intermediate coronary lesions.

Authors:  Tomokazu Iguchi; Takao Hasegawa; Satoshi Nishimura; Shinji Nakata; Toru Kataoka; Shoichi Ehara; Akihisa Hanatani; Kenei Shimada; Minoru Yoshiyama
Journal:  Clin Cardiol       Date:  2012-11-06       Impact factor: 2.882

8.  Does routine pressure wire assessment influence management strategy at coronary angiography for diagnosis of chest pain?: the RIPCORD study.

Authors:  Nick Curzen; Omar Rana; Zoe Nicholas; Peter Golledge; Azfar Zaman; Keith Oldroyd; Colm Hanratty; Adrian Banning; Stephen Wheatcroft; Alex Hobson; Kam Chitkara; David Hildick-Smith; Dan McKenzie; Alison Calver; Borislav D Dimitrov; Simon Corbett
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2014-03-18       Impact factor: 6.546

9.  Prediction of fractional flow reserve with angiographic DILEMMA score.

Authors:  Osman Beton; Hakkı Kaya; Okan Onur Turgut; Mehmet Birhan Yılmaz
Journal:  Anatol J Cardiol       Date:  2016-11-10       Impact factor: 1.596

10.  Impact of Percutaneous Revascularization on Exercise Hemodynamics in Patients With Stable Coronary Disease.

Authors:  Christopher M Cook; Yousif Ahmad; James P Howard; Matthew J Shun-Shin; Amarjit Sethi; Gerald J Clesham; Kare H Tang; Sukhjinder S Nijjer; Paul A Kelly; John R Davies; Iqbal S Malik; Raffi Kaprielian; Ghada Mikhail; Ricardo Petraco; Firas Al-Janabi; Grigoris V Karamasis; Shah Mohdnazri; Reto Gamma; Rasha Al-Lamee; Thomas R Keeble; Jamil Mayet; Sayan Sen; Darrel P Francis; Justin E Davies
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2018-08-28       Impact factor: 24.094

View more
  3 in total

1.  Feasibility and Validity of Computed Tomography-Derived Fractional Flow Reserve in Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis: The CAST-FFR Study.

Authors:  Michael Michail; Abdul-Rahman Ihdayhid; Andrea Comella; Udit Thakur; James D Cameron; Liam M McCormick; Robert P Gooley; Stephen J Nicholls; Anthony Mathur; Alun D Hughes; Brian S Ko; Adam J Brown
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2020-12-16       Impact factor: 6.546

2.  Comparison of diagnostic performance between quantitative flow ratio, non-hyperemic pressure indices and fractional flow reserve.

Authors:  Ojas Hrakesh Mehta; Michael Hay; Ren Yik Lim; Abdul Rahman Ihdayhid; Michael Michail; Jun Michael Zhang; James D Cameron; Dennis T L Wong
Journal:  Cardiovasc Diagn Ther       Date:  2020-06

3.  Clinical prediction models of fractional flow reserve: an exploration of the current evidence and appraisal of model performance.

Authors:  Wenjie Zuo; Rui Zhang; Mingming Yang; Zhenjun Ji; Yanru He; Yamin Su; Yangyang Qu; Zaixiao Tao; Genshan Ma
Journal:  Quant Imaging Med Surg       Date:  2021-06
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.