UNLABELLED: Visual judgment of stenosis severity from cine-film or single-photon emission computed tomographic dipyridamole perfusion images was compared to assessment of stenosis severity as measured with digital quantitative coronary angiography. Thirty patients with angiographically verified single-vessel disease underwent dipyridamole thallium stress testing within 90 days of angiography. RESULTS: A percent diameter stenosis of > or = 50%, a percent area stenosis of > or = 75%, and a stenotic flow reserve of < 3.75 measured by quantitative coronary angiography (CMS, version 1.1, Medis Inc.) corresponded to haemodynamically significant stenosis as evaluated by visual estimates from cine-film or perfusion images. Quantitative coronary angiography percent diameter stenosis (51.2% +/- 12.6%) correlated closely (r = 0.74) but underestimated significantly visual assessment of stenosis severity from cine-film (69.3% +/- 21.2%; P = 0.0001). However, quantitative coronary angiography percent area stenosis (74.7% +/- 11.7%) more closely reflected visual estimates from cine-film (P = 0.19). Quantitative coronary angiography stenotic flow reserve showed the highest positive and negative predictive value regarding visual estimates from cine-film (88%, 86%) or perfusion images (88%, 64%) followed by percent diameter stenosis (86%, 75% 86%, 56%) and percent area stenosis (87%, 80%, 87%, 60%), respectively. CONCLUSION: Evaluation of coronary lesions by quantitative coronary angiography corresponds closely with visual estimates from cine-film and haemodynamic significance as evaluated by dipyridamole perfusion images.
UNLABELLED: Visual judgment of stenosis severity from cine-film or single-photon emission computed tomographic dipyridamole perfusion images was compared to assessment of stenosis severity as measured with digital quantitative coronary angiography. Thirty patients with angiographically verified single-vessel disease underwent dipyridamole thallium stress testing within 90 days of angiography. RESULTS: A percent diameter stenosis of > or = 50%, a percent area stenosis of > or = 75%, and a stenotic flow reserve of < 3.75 measured by quantitative coronary angiography (CMS, version 1.1, Medis Inc.) corresponded to haemodynamically significant stenosis as evaluated by visual estimates from cine-film or perfusion images. Quantitative coronary angiography percent diameter stenosis (51.2% +/- 12.6%) correlated closely (r = 0.74) but underestimated significantly visual assessment of stenosis severity from cine-film (69.3% +/- 21.2%; P = 0.0001). However, quantitative coronary angiography percent area stenosis (74.7% +/- 11.7%) more closely reflected visual estimates from cine-film (P = 0.19). Quantitative coronary angiography stenotic flow reserve showed the highest positive and negative predictive value regarding visual estimates from cine-film (88%, 86%) or perfusion images (88%, 64%) followed by percent diameter stenosis (86%, 75% 86%, 56%) and percent area stenosis (87%, 80%, 87%, 60%), respectively. CONCLUSION: Evaluation of coronary lesions by quantitative coronary angiography corresponds closely with visual estimates from cine-film and haemodynamic significance as evaluated by dipyridamole perfusion images.
Authors: G K Godoy; A Vavere; J M Miller; H Chahal; H Niinuma; P Lemos; J Hoe; N Paul; M E Clouse; C D Ramos; J A Lima; A Arbab-Zadeh Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2012-07-20 Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Richard T George; Vishal C Mehra; Marcus Y Chen; Kakuya Kitagawa; Armin Arbab-Zadeh; Julie M Miller; Matthew B Matheson; Andrea L Vavere; Klaus F Kofoed; Carlos E Rochitte; Marc Dewey; Tan S Yaw; Hiroyuki Niinuma; Winfried Brenner; Christopher Cox; Melvin E Clouse; João A C Lima; Marcelo Di Carli Journal: Radiology Date: 2014-05-26 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Elizabeth L Potter; Colin Machado; Yuvaraj Malaiapan; Om Narayan; Brian S H Ko; Peter J Psaltis; Kiran Munnur; James D Cameron; Ian T Meredith; Dennis Thiam Leong Wong Journal: Cardiovasc Diagn Ther Date: 2017-02
Authors: Woo-Young Chung; Byoung-Joo Choi; Seong-Hoon Lim; Yoshiki Matsuo; Ryan J Lennon; Rajiv Gulati; Gurpreet S Sandhu; David R Holmes; Charanjit S Rihal; Amir Lerman Journal: J Korean Med Sci Date: 2015-05-13 Impact factor: 2.153
Authors: Thiago A Macedo; Rodrigo P Pedrosa; Valeria Costa-Hong; Luiz J Kajita; Gustavo R Morais; Jose J G De Lima; Luciano F Drager; Luiz A Bortolotto Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-03-14 Impact factor: 3.240