Literature DB >> 31029497

Correlation between intracoronary physiology and myocardial perfusion imaging in patients with severe aortic stenosis.

Roberto Scarsini1, Rosaria Cantone2, Gabriele Venturi2, Giovanni Luigi De Maria3, Andrea Variola4, Paolo Braggio5, Mattia Lunardi2, Gabriele Pesarini2, Marco Ferdeghini5, Anna Piccoli6, Mauro Feola7, Rajesh K Kharbanda3, Adrian P Banning3, Flavio Ribichini8.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Aortic stenosis (AS) is frequently associated with coronary artery disease (CAD). However, the best tool to functionally assess CAD in AS remains undetermined. Fractional flow reserve (FFR) and instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) have never been validated in AS.
METHODS: FFR, iFR and stress single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) were performed in a consecutive series of 28 patients with severe AS and 41 borderline coronary lesions during the work-up for valve replacement.
RESULTS: Both FFR and iFR were correlated with an abnormal SPECT. At ROC analysis, FFR yielded an AUC = 0.91 with negative predictive value (NPV) = 95% in detecting ischemia according to SPECT. iFR showed significant worse agreement with myocardial perfusion imaging compared to FFR (59% vs 85%, p = 0.014). Specifically, a significant larger proportion of false positive measurements (negative SPECT and iFR < 0.89) was observed using iFR vs FFR: 39% vs 12%, p = 0.011. Using a pre-specified 0.82 cut-off, the iFR agreement with SPECT increased to 73%.
CONCLUSIONS: FFR yielded a good correlation with SPECT and a high NPV in detecting ischemia-provoking lesions. iFR diagnostic metrics were inferior compared with FFR and improved adopting a lower ischemic threshold.
Copyright © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Aortic stenosis; Coronary artery disease; Fractional flow reserve; Instantaneous wave-free period; Single photon emission computed tomography; Transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31029497     DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2019.04.050

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Cardiol        ISSN: 0167-5273            Impact factor:   4.164


  6 in total

Review 1.  Physiological Assessment of Coronary Lesions in 2020.

Authors:  Mohsin Chowdhury; Eric A Osborn
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2020-01-15

2.  Diagnostic performance of quantitative flow ratio, non-hyperaemic pressure indices and fractional flow reserve for the assessment of coronary lesions in severe aortic stenosis.

Authors:  Cameron Dowling; Michael Michail; Jun Michael Zhang; Andrea Comella; Udit Thakur; Robert Gooley; Liam McCormick; Adam J Brown; Dennis T L Wong
Journal:  Cardiovasc Diagn Ther       Date:  2022-06

Review 3.  Challenges in Diagnosis and Functional Assessment of Coronary Artery Disease in Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis.

Authors:  Srdjan Aleksandric; Marko Banovic; Branko Beleslin
Journal:  Front Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2022-03-11

Review 4.  Why, When and How Should Clinicians Use Physiology in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndromes?

Authors:  Roberto Scarsini; Dimitrios Terentes-Printzios; Giovanni Luigi De Maria; Flavio Ribichini; Adrian Banning
Journal:  Interv Cardiol       Date:  2020-06-04

5.  The clinical value and safety of ECG-gated dipyridamole myocardial perfusion imaging in patients with aortic stenosis.

Authors:  Fang-Shin Liu; Shan-Ying Wang; Yu-Chien Shiau; Yen-Wen Wu
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-08-27       Impact factor: 4.379

6.  Physiological Versus Angiographic Guidance for Myocardial Revascularization in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation.

Authors:  Mattia Lunardi; Roberto Scarsini; Gabriele Venturi; Gabriele Pesarini; Michele Pighi; Andrea Gratta; Leonardo Gottin; Marco Barbierato; Francesco Caprioglio; Anna Piccoli; Valeria Ferrero; Flavio Ribichini
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2019-11-13       Impact factor: 5.501

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.