Literature DB >> 33224482

Diagnostic performance of virtual fractional flow reserve derived from routine coronary angiography using segmentation free reduced order (1-dimensional) flow modelling.

Kevin Mohee1, Jonathan P Mynard2,3,4,5, Gauravsingh Dhunnoo1, Rhodri Davies1, Perumal Nithiarasu6, Julian P Halcox7, Daniel R Obaid7.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Fractional flow reserve (FFR) improves assessment of the physiological significance of coronary lesions compared with conventional angiography. However, it is an invasive investigation. We tested the performance of a virtual FFR (1D-vFFR) using routine angiographic images and a rapidly performed reduced order computational model.
METHODS: Quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) was performed in 102 with coronary lesions assessed by invasive FFR. A 1D-vFFR for each lesion was created using reduced order (one-dimensional) computational flow modelling derived from conventional angiographic images and patient specific estimates of coronary flow. The diagnostic accuracy of 1D-vFFR and QCA derived stenosis was compared against the gold standard of invasive FFR using area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUC).
RESULTS: QCA revealed the mean coronary stenosis diameter was 44% ± 12% and lesion length 13 ± 7 mm. Following angiography calculation of the 1DvFFR took less than one minute. Coronary stenosis (QCA) had a significant but weak correlation with FFR (r = -0.2, p = 0.04) and poor diagnostic performance to identify lesions with FFR <0.80 (AUC 0.39, p = 0.09), (sensitivity - 58% and specificity - 26% at a QCA stenosis of 50%). In contrast, 1D-vFFR had a better correlation with FFR (r = 0.32, p = 0.01) and significantly better diagnostic performance (AUC 0.67, p = 0.007), (sensitivity - 92% and specificity - 29% at a 1D-vFFR of 0.7).
CONCLUSIONS: 1D-vFFR improves the determination of functionally significant coronary lesions compared with conventional angiography without requiring a pressure-wire or hyperaemia induction. It is fast enough to influence immediate clinical decision-making but requires further clinical evaluation.
© The Author(s) 2020.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Coronary imaging: angiography/ultrasound/Doppler/CC; cardiovascular imaging agents/techniques; catheter-based coronary interventions: stents

Year:  2020        PMID: 33224482      PMCID: PMC7656870          DOI: 10.1177/2048004020967578

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JRSM Cardiovasc Dis        ISSN: 2048-0040


  34 in total

1.  Fractional flow reserve versus angiography for guiding percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease: 2-year follow-up of the FAME (Fractional Flow Reserve Versus Angiography for Multivessel Evaluation) study.

Authors:  Nico H J Pijls; William F Fearon; Pim A L Tonino; Uwe Siebert; Fumiaki Ikeno; Bernhard Bornschein; Marcel van't Veer; Volker Klauss; Ganesh Manoharan; Thomas Engstrøm; Keith G Oldroyd; Peter N Ver Lee; Philip A MacCarthy; Bernard De Bruyne
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2010-05-28       Impact factor: 24.094

2.  Denmark: coronary and structural heart interventions from 2010 to 2015.

Authors:  Hans-Henrik Tilsted; Ole Ahlehoff; Christian J Terkelsen; Frants Pedersen; Cengiz Özcan; Troels H Jørgensen; Jens E Nielsen-Kudsk; Jan Ravkilde; Henrik Nissen; Sune A Pedersen; Ole Havndrup; Jens F Lassen
Journal:  EuroIntervention       Date:  2017-05-15       Impact factor: 6.534

3.  Flow characteristics in models of arterial stenoses. I. Steady flow.

Authors:  D F Young; F Y Tsai
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  1973-07       Impact factor: 2.712

4.  1-Year Outcomes of FFRCT-Guided Care in Patients With Suspected Coronary Disease: The PLATFORM Study.

Authors:  Pamela S Douglas; Bernard De Bruyne; Gianluca Pontone; Manesh R Patel; Bjarne L Norgaard; Robert A Byrne; Nick Curzen; Ian Purcell; Matthias Gutberlet; Gilles Rioufol; Ulrich Hink; Herwig Walter Schuchlenz; Gudrun Feuchtner; Martine Gilard; Daniele Andreini; Jesper M Jensen; Martin Hadamitzky; Karen Chiswell; Derek Cyr; Alan Wilk; Furong Wang; Campbell Rogers; Mark A Hlatky
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2016-08-02       Impact factor: 24.094

5.  Noninvasive FFR Derived From Coronary CT Angiography: Management and Outcomes in the PROMISE Trial.

Authors:  Michael T Lu; Maros Ferencik; Rhonda S Roberts; Kerry L Lee; Alexander Ivanov; Elizabeth Adami; Daniel B Mark; Farouc A Jaffer; Jonathon A Leipsic; Pamela S Douglas; Udo Hoffmann
Journal:  JACC Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2017-04-12

6.  Fractional flow reserve versus angiography for guiding percutaneous coronary intervention.

Authors:  Pim A L Tonino; Bernard De Bruyne; Nico H J Pijls; Uwe Siebert; Fumiaki Ikeno; Marcel van' t Veer; Volker Klauss; Ganesh Manoharan; Thomas Engstrøm; Keith G Oldroyd; Peter N Ver Lee; Philip A MacCarthy; William F Fearon
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2009-01-15       Impact factor: 91.245

7.  Scaling of myocardial mass to flow and morphometry of coronary arteries.

Authors:  Jenny Susana Choy; Ghassan S Kassab
Journal:  J Appl Physiol (1985)       Date:  2008-03-06

8.  Diagnostic performance of noninvasive fractional flow reserve derived from coronary computed tomography angiography in suspected coronary artery disease: the NXT trial (Analysis of Coronary Blood Flow Using CT Angiography: Next Steps).

Authors:  Bjarne L Nørgaard; Jonathon Leipsic; Sara Gaur; Sujith Seneviratne; Brian S Ko; Hiroshi Ito; Jesper M Jensen; Laura Mauri; Bernard De Bruyne; Hiram Bezerra; Kazuhiro Osawa; Mohamed Marwan; Christoph Naber; Andrejs Erglis; Seung-Jung Park; Evald H Christiansen; Anne Kaltoft; Jens F Lassen; Hans Erik Bøtker; Stephan Achenbach
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2014-01-30       Impact factor: 24.094

9.  Clinical outcomes of fractional flow reserve by computed tomographic angiography-guided diagnostic strategies vs. usual care in patients with suspected coronary artery disease: the prospective longitudinal trial of FFR(CT): outcome and resource impacts study.

Authors:  Pamela S Douglas; Gianluca Pontone; Mark A Hlatky; Manesh R Patel; Bjarne L Norgaard; Robert A Byrne; Nick Curzen; Ian Purcell; Matthias Gutberlet; Gilles Rioufol; Ulrich Hink; Herwig Walter Schuchlenz; Gudrun Feuchtner; Martine Gilard; Daniele Andreini; Jesper M Jensen; Martin Hadamitzky; Karen Chiswell; Derek Cyr; Alan Wilk; Furong Wang; Campbell Rogers; Bernard De Bruyne
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2015-09-01       Impact factor: 29.983

10.  Evaluation of Coronary Artery Stenosis by Quantitative Flow Ratio During Invasive Coronary Angiography: The WIFI II Study (Wire-Free Functional Imaging II).

Authors:  Jelmer Westra; Shengxian Tu; Simon Winther; Louise Nissen; Mai-Britt Vestergaard; Birgitte Krogsgaard Andersen; Emil Nielsen Holck; Camilla Fox Maule; Jane Kirk Johansen; Lene Nyhus Andreasen; Jo Krogsgaard Simonsen; Yimin Zhang; Steen Dalby Kristensen; Michael Maeng; Anne Kaltoft; Christian Juhl Terkelsen; Lars Romer Krusell; Lars Jakobsen; Johan H C Reiber; Jens Flensted Lassen; Morten Bøttcher; Hans Erik Bøtker; Evald Høj Christiansen; Niels Ramsing Holm
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2018-03       Impact factor: 7.792

View more
  1 in total

1.  A machine learning model for non-invasive detection of atherosclerotic coronary artery aneurysm.

Authors:  Ali A Rostam-Alilou; Marziyeh Safari; Hamid R Jarrah; Ali Zolfagharian; Mahdi Bodaghi
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2022-08-10       Impact factor: 3.421

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.