2,646 research outputs found

    A New Approach in Risk Stratification by Coronary CT Angiography.

    Get PDF
    For a decade, coronary computed tomographic angiography (CCTA) has been used as a promising noninvasive modality for the assessment of coronary artery disease (CAD) as well as cardiovascular risks. CCTA can provide more information incorporating the presence, extent, and severity of CAD; coronary plaque burden; and characteristics that highly correlate with those on invasive coronary angiography. Moreover, recent techniques of CCTA allow assessing hemodynamic significance of CAD. CCTA may be potentially used as a substitute for other invasive or noninvasive modalities. This review summarizes risk stratification by anatomical and hemodynamic information of CAD, coronary plaque characteristics, and burden observed on CCTA

    Fractional flow reserve-guided management in stable coronary disease and acute myocardial infarction: recent developments

    Get PDF
    Coronary artery disease (CAD) is a leading global cause of morbidity and mortality, and improvements in the diagnosis and treatment of CAD can reduce the health and economic burden of this condition. Fractional flow reserve (FFR) is an evidence-based diagnostic test of the physiological significance of a coronary artery stenosis. Fractional flow reserve is a pressure-derived index of the maximal achievable myocardial blood flow in the presence of an epicardial coronary stenosis as a ratio to maximum achievable flow if that artery were normal. When compared with standard angiography-guided management, FFR disclosure is impactful on the decision for revascularization and clinical outcomes. In this article, we review recent developments with FFR in patients with stable CAD and recent myocardial infarction. Specifically, we review novel developments in our understanding of CAD pathophysiology, diagnostic applications, prognostic studies, clinical trials, and clinical guidelines

    ํ˜ˆ๊ด€ ์กฐ์˜์ˆ  ๊ธฐ๋ฐ˜ ์ •๋Ÿ‰์  ์œ ๋Ÿ‰๋น„๋ฅผ ์ด์šฉํ•œ ๋™๋งฅ๊ฒฝํ™”๋ฐ˜์˜ ํŠน์„ฑ ๋ฐ ์ž„์ƒ ์˜ˆํ›„ ์˜ˆ์ธก

    Get PDF
    ํ•™์œ„๋…ผ๋ฌธ(๋ฐ•์‚ฌ) -- ์„œ์šธ๋Œ€ํ•™๊ต๋Œ€ํ•™์› : ์˜๊ณผ๋Œ€ํ•™ ์˜ํ•™๊ณผ, 2022. 8. ๊ตฌ๋ณธ๊ถŒ.์„œ๋ก : ์‹ฌ์žฅํ˜ˆ๊ด€์˜ ํ˜‘์ฐฉ์„ ํ‰๊ฐ€ํ•˜๊ณ  ์ค‘์žฌ ์‹œ์ˆ ์„ ํ•˜๋Š” ๊ฐ€์žฅ ํ‘œ์ค€์ ์ธ ํ‰๊ฐ€ ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ•์€ ๊ฒฝํ”ผ์  ๊ด€์ƒ๋™๋งฅ ์กฐ์˜์ˆ ์ด๋‹ค. ๊ด€์ƒ ๋™๋งฅ ์งˆํ™˜์˜ ์˜ˆํ›„๋ฅผ ๊ฒฐ์ •ํ•˜๋Š” ๊ฐ€์žฅ ์ค‘์š”ํ•œ ์š”์†Œ๋Š” ์‹ฌ๊ทผ์˜ ํ—ˆํ˜ˆ ์ •๋„์ด๋ฉฐ ์ด๋Š” ์‹ฌ๊ทผ๋ถ„ํšํ˜ˆ๋ฅ˜ (fractional flow reserve, FFR)๋ฅผ ํ†ตํ•ด ํ™•์ธํ•  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๊ธฐ์—, FFR์„ ์ด์šฉํ•œ ์žฌ๊ด€๋ฅ˜ ์‹œ์ˆ ์ด ์ค‘๋“ฑ๋„์˜ ํ˜ˆ๊ด€ ํ˜‘์ฐฉ์ด ์žˆ๋Š” ํ™˜์ž์—์„œ ํ‘œ์ค€ ์น˜๋ฃŒ๋กœ ์•Œ๋ ค์ ธ ์žˆ๋‹ค. ํ•˜์ง€๋งŒ FFR ์ธก์ •์€ ์‹œ์ˆ  ์‹œ๊ฐ„์ด ๊ธธ์–ด์ง€๊ณ , ์ถฉํ˜ˆ์ œ๋ฅผ ์‚ฌ์šฉํ•ด์•ผ ํ•˜๊ณ , ์••๋ ฅ ์ฒ ์„ ์„ ์‚ฌ์šฉํ•˜๋Š” ๋ถˆํŽธํ•จ์ด ์žˆ๋‹ค. ํ˜ˆ๊ด€ ์กฐ์˜์ˆ  ๊ธฐ๋ฐ˜ ์ •๋Ÿ‰์  ์œ ๋Ÿ‰๋น„ (Quantitative flow ratio, QFR)๋Š” ์ปดํ“จํ„ฐ ์œ ์ฒด์—ญํ•™ ๊ธฐ์ˆ ์„ ๊ธฐ๋ฐ˜์œผ๋กœ ํ•˜์—ฌ 2๊ฐœ์˜ ๊ด€๋™๋งฅ ์กฐ์˜์ˆ  ์˜์ƒ์„ ๊ฐ€์ง€๊ณ  ๊ด€์ƒ๋™๋งฅ์„ 3์ฐจ์› ์žฌ๊ฑดํ•˜๊ณ  ํ˜ˆ๋ฅ˜์˜ ์†๋„์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์ •๋ณด๋ฅผ ๋”ํ•˜์—ฌ ๊ธฐ์กด์— ์นจ์Šต์ ์œผ๋กœ๋งŒ ์–ป์–ด๋‚ผ ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ์—ˆ๋˜ FFR์˜ ๊ฐ’์„ ์‹ฌํ˜ˆ๊ด€ ์กฐ์˜์ˆ  ์˜์ƒ๋งŒ์œผ๋กœ ๊ตฌํ˜„ํ•ด ๋‚ด๋Š” ์ธ๊ณต์ง€๋Šฅ๊ธฐ์ˆ ์ด๋‹ค. ํ˜ˆ๊ด€๋‚ด ์ดˆ์ŒํŒŒ๋Š” ๊ด€์ƒ๋™๋งฅ ์ค‘์žฌ์‹œ์ˆ  ํ•˜๋Š” ์ค‘์—, ํ•ด๋ถ€ํ•™์ ์ธ ํ˜ˆ๊ด€ ๋‚ด ๋ณ‘๋ณ€, ํ˜ˆ๊ด€ ๋‚ด ๋™๋งฅ๊ฒฝํ™”๋ฐ˜์˜ ํŠน์„ฑ์„ ์–ป์–ด๋‚ผ ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋Š” ๋„๊ตฌ์ด๋‹ค. ์ด๋Š” ์—ญ์‹œ ์นจ์Šต์ ์ธ ๊ด€๋™๋งฅ ์ค‘์žฌ์ˆ ๋กœ ์–ป์„ ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋Š” ์ •๋ณด์ด๋‹ค. ์•„์ง QFR ์ •๋ณด์™€ ํ˜ˆ๊ด€๋‚ด ์ดˆ์ŒํŒŒ ์ •๋ณด์™€์˜ ๊ด€๊ณ„๋Š” ์ž˜ ์•Œ๋ ค์ง„ ๋ฐ”๊ฐ€ ์—†์–ด, ๋น„์นจ์Šต์  QFR๊ฐ’๊ณผ ํ˜ˆ๊ด€๋‚ด ์ดˆ์ŒํŒŒ ์ •๋ณด์‚ฌ์ด์˜ ๊ด€๊ณ„์— ๋Œ€ํ•ด ์•Œ์•„๋ณด๊ณ ์ž ํ•œ๋‹ค. ๋ฟ๋งŒ ์•„๋‹ˆ๋ผ ์šฐ๋ฆฌ๋Š” QFR์„ ๊ตฌํ•  ๋•Œ ๊ฐ™์ด ์–ป์„ ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋Š” QFR ๊ทธ๋ž˜ํ”„์—์„œ ์–ป์–ด๋‚ผ ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋Š” ์ธ๋ฑ์Šค๋กœ ํ™˜์ž์— ์žˆ์–ด ํ—ˆํ˜ˆ๊ณผ์˜ ๊ด€๊ณ„์™€ ํ™˜์ž์˜ ์ž„์ƒ์  ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ ์‚ฌ์ด์˜ ๊ด€๊ณ„๋„ ํ™•์ธํ•˜๊ณ ์ž ํ•œ๋‹ค. ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ•: ๊ธฐ์กด์˜ ์ „ํ–ฅ์  ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์ธ FLAVOUR study๋Š” 1700๋ช…์˜ ์ค‘๋“ฑ๋„ ๊ด€์ƒ๋™๋งฅ ํ˜‘์ฐฉ์„ ๊ฐ€์ง„ ํ™˜์ž๋“ค์„ ๋Œ€์ƒ์œผ๋กœ ๋ฌด์ž‘์œ„ ๋ฐฐ์ •ํ•˜์—ฌ ํ˜ˆ๊ด€๋‚ด ์ดˆ์ŒํŒŒ ๊ธฐ๋ฐ˜์˜ ๊ด€์ƒ๋™๋งฅ ์ค‘์žฌ์ˆ ๊ณผ FFR๊ธฐ๋ฐ˜ ๊ด€์ƒ๋™๋งฅ ์ค‘์žฌ์ˆ ์˜ 2๋…„ ์ถ”์ ๊ฒ€์‚ฌ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๋ฅผ ๋ฐ”ํƒ•์œผ๋กœ ํ•˜๋Š” ๋‹ค๊ธฐ๊ด€, ์ „ํ–ฅ์ , ๋ฌด์ž‘์œ„ ๋ฐฐ์ • ์ž„์ƒ ์‹œํ—˜์ด๋‹ค. ์ด ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์— ๋“ฑ๋ก๋œ ์‹ฌํ˜ˆ๊ด€ ์กฐ์˜์ˆ  ์ค‘์— QFR ๋ถ„์„์ด ๊ฐ€๋Šฅํ•œ ํ˜ˆ๊ด€์„ ๊ฒ€ํ† ํ•˜์—ฌ ์ค‘์•™ ๋ถ„์„๊ธฐ๊ด€์—์„œ QFR ๋ถ„์„์„ ์‹œํ–‰ํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. QFR ๊ฐ’์ด 0.80 ์ดํ•˜์ธ ๊ฒƒ์„ ํ˜ˆ์—ญํ•™์ ์œผ๋กœ ์œ ์˜๋ฏธํ•œ ๊ฒƒ์œผ๋กœ ์ •์˜ํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ํ˜ˆ๊ด€๋‚ด ์ดˆ์ŒํŒŒ ํŠน์„ฑ์€ QFR ๊ฐ’ 0.80 ๊ธฐ์ค€์œผ๋กœ ๋‘๊ทธ๋ฃน๊ฐ„ ๋น„๊ตํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. Final QFR์˜ ์˜๋ฏธ๋Š” ์ค‘์žฌ์ˆ ์„ ํ•˜์ง€ ์•Š์€ ํ™˜์ž์—์„œ๋Š” ์ง„๋‹จ์  ๊ด€์ƒ๋™๋งฅ ์กฐ์˜์ˆ  ์˜์ƒ์—์„œ ๊ณ„์‚ฐํ•œ QFR๊ฐ’, ์ค‘์žฌ์ˆ ์„ ์‹œํ–‰ํ•œ ํ™˜์ž๋Š” ์‹œ์ˆ  ํ›„ ๋งˆ์ง€๋ง‰ ๊ด€์ƒ๋™๋งฅ ์กฐ์˜์ˆ  ์˜์ƒ์—์„œ ์–ป์€ QFR ๊ฐ’์„ ๋œปํ•œ๋‹ค. QFR ๊ณก์„  ๋ถ„์„์„ ํ†ตํ•ด์„œ ๊ณก์„  ์ƒ๋ฐฉ์˜ ๋ฉด์ ์˜ ๋น„์œจ (%area above the QFR curve, %AAC) ๊ฐ€ ๊ตฌํ•ด์กŒ๊ณ  ์ด๋Š” ๊ณก์„  ์œ„ ๋ฉด์ /์ „์ฒด ๋ฉด์  X 100 (%)์œผ๋กœ ๊ณ„์‚ฐ๋œ๋‹ค. ์ฃผ๊ฐ€ ๋˜๋Š” ๋น„๊ต๋Š” 2์ฐจ์›์  ์ •๋Ÿ‰์  ๊ด€์ƒ๋™๋งฅ ์กฐ์˜์ˆ  (2D-quantitative coronary angiography, 2D-QCA)์—์„œ ํ™•์ธ๋˜๋Š” ์ง๊ฒฝ ํ˜‘์ฐฉ์— ๋น„ํ•ด QFR 0.80์ดํ•˜๊ฐ€ FFR 0.80์ดํ•˜๋ฅผ ์˜ˆ์ธกํ•˜๋Š” ์ •ํ™•์„ฑ์œผ๋กœ ํ•˜์˜€๊ณ , ๊ธฐ์กด2D-QCA์—์„œ ์–ป์€ ์ง๊ฒฝ ํ˜‘์ฐฉ์— ๋น„ํ•ด QFR์˜ FFR 0.80 ์ดํ•˜๋ฅผ ์˜ˆ์ธกํ•˜๋Š” Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve (ROC) ๊ณก์„ ์˜ ๋ฉด์  ๋น„๊ต๋ฅผ ํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ํ˜ˆ๊ด€๋‚ด ์ดˆ์ŒํŒŒ๊ตฐ์—์„œ๋„ ๋น„์Šทํ•œ ๋ฐฉ์‹์œผ๋กœ ํ˜ˆ๊ด€๋‚ด ์ดˆ์ŒํŒŒ์ƒ์˜ ํ•ด๋ถ€ํ•™์ ์ธ ํ˜‘์ฐฉ, ๋ถˆ์•ˆ์ • ๋™๋งฅ๊ฒฝํ™”๋ฐ˜์„ ์˜ˆ์ธกํ•˜๋Š” ๋Šฅ๋ ฅ์„ ๋น„๊ตํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ์ผ์ฐจ ์ž„์ƒ์ข…๋ฃŒ์ ์€ 2๋…„์งธ ๊นŒ์ง€์˜ ์‚ฌ๋ง, ๋ชฉํ‘œํ˜ˆ๊ด€ ๊ด€๋ จ ์‹ฌ๊ทผ๊ฒฝ์ƒ‰, ๋ชฉํ‘œํ˜ˆ๊ด€ ์žฌ๊ฐœํ†ต์ˆ ๋กœ ์ •์˜ํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ: ์ตœ์ข…์ ์œผ๋กœ QFR ๋ถ„์„์ด ๊ฐ€๋Šฅํ•œ ํ˜ˆ๊ด€์€ 867๊ฐœ์˜€๋‹ค. 3D-QCA ์ง๊ฒฝ ํ˜‘์ฐฉ 50% ์ด์ƒ์ด ํ—ˆํ˜ˆ์„ ์˜ˆ์ธกํ•˜๋Š” ์ •ํ™•๋„๋Š” 52.2% ์ธ ๊ฒƒ์— ๋น„ํ•ด, QFR 0.80 ์ดํ•˜์˜ ํ—ˆํ˜ˆ ์˜ˆ์ธก ์ •ํ™•๋„๋Š” 92.7% ์˜€๋‹ค. QFR์˜ FFR 0.80 ์ดํ•˜๋ฅผ ์˜ˆ์ธกํ•˜๋Š” ๋Šฅ๋ ฅ์€ ROC ์ปค๋ธŒ๋ฅผ ๋ณผ ๋•Œ 2D-QCA์—์„œ ์–ป์–ด์ง„ ๋ฐ์ดํ„ฐ๋‚˜, 3D-QCA์—์„œ ์–ป์–ด์ง„ ๋ฐ์ดํ„ฐ์— ๋น„ํ•ด AUC ๋ฉด์ ์ด ์ปธ๋‹ค (QFR: 0.973 vs. 2D QCA %DS: 0.738). QFR 0.80 ์ดํ•˜์ธ ๊ตฐ์€ QFR 0.80์„ ์ดˆ๊ณผํ•˜๋Š” ๊ตฐ์— ๋น„ํ•ด ๋ณ‘๋ณ€์˜ ๊ธธ์ด๊ฐ€ ๊ธธ๊ณ , ์ตœ์†Œ ๋‚ด๊ฐ• ๋ฉด์ ์€ ์ž‘๊ณ , ๋™๋งฅ๊ฒฝํ™”๋ฐ˜์˜ ์–‘์ด ๋งŽ์•˜๋‹ค. ํ•ด๋ถ€ํ•™์ ์ธ ํŠน์„ฑ๋ฟ๋งŒ ์•„๋‹ˆ๋ผ, ๋™๋งฅ๊ฒฝํ™”๋ฐ˜์˜ ํŠน์„ฑ๋„ ์ฐจ์ด๊ฐ€ ์žˆ์—ˆ๋Š”๋ฐ, QFR 0.80 ์ดํ•˜์ธ ๊ตฐ์€ QFR 0.80์„ ์ดˆ๊ณผํ•˜๋Š” ๊ตฐ์— ๋น„ํ•ด ์ €์Œ์˜ ๋™๋งฅ๊ฒฝํ™”๋ฐ˜, ํ˜ผํ•ฉ ๋™๋งฅ๊ฒฝํ™”๋ฐ˜, ๋™๋งฅ๊ฒฝํ™”๋ฐ˜์˜ ํŒŒ์—ด, ์„ํšŒํ™” ๊ฒฐ์ ˆ ๋ฐ ์–‘์„ฑ ์žฌํ˜•์„ฑ์˜ ๋น„์œจ์ด ๋†’์•˜๊ณ , ์„ฌ์œ ์„ฑ ๋™๋งฅ๊ฒฝํ™”๋ฐ˜์˜ ๋น„์œจ์€ ๋‚ฎ์•˜๋‹ค. ๋‹ค๋งŒQFR์˜ ์ •ํ™•๋„๋Š” ๋ชฉํ‘œ๋ณ‘๋ณ€์˜ ๊ธธ์ด๊ฐ€ 35 mm์ด์ƒ์œผ๋กœ ๊ธธ์–ด์งˆ ๊ฒฝ์šฐ์— ๊ฐ์†Œํ•˜๋Š” ๊ฒฝํ–ฅ์„ ๋ณด์˜€๋‹ค. ์ด๋Ÿฐ ๋ฏธ๋งŒ์„ฑ ๋ณ‘๋ณ€์—์„œ QFR์— %AACvessel ๋ฐ์ดํ„ฐ๋ฅผ ์ถ”๊ฐ€ํ•  ๊ฒฝ์šฐ์— FFR 0.80 ์ดํ•˜๋ฅผ ์˜ˆ์ธกํ•˜๋Š” ์˜ˆ์ธก๋Šฅ์ด ํ˜ธ์ „๋˜๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์„ ํ™•์ธํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค (AUC: from 0.898 to 0.914; NRI: 0.886, p=0.011; IDI: 0.053, p=0.139). Final QFR ์ด ๋‚ฎ์€ (<0.92) ๊ตฐ์€ Final QFR ์ด ๋†’์€ ๊ตฐ (โ‰ฅ0.92)์— ๋น„ํ•ด ์ผ์ฐจ ์ž„์ƒ์ข…๋ฃŒ์  ๋ฐœ์ƒ์˜ ๋นˆ๋„๊ฐ€ ๋†’์€ ๊ฒƒ์„ ํ™•์ธํ•  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ์—ˆ๋‹ค (final QFR ๋‚ฎ์€ ๊ตฐ vs. final QFR ๋†’์€ ๊ตฐ: 4.7% vs. 1.5%; HR: 3.21; 95% CI: 1.17-8.84; p=0.017). ๊ฒฐ๋ก : QFR 0.80 ์ดํ•˜์ธ ๊ตฐ์€ ํ˜ˆ๊ด€๋‚ด ์ดˆ์ŒํŒŒ์ƒ ๋ณด์ด๋Š” ํ•ด๋ถ€ํ•™์ ์œผ๋กœ ์‹ฌํ•œ ๋ณ‘๋ณ€์˜ ํŠน์„ฑ๋ฟ ์•„๋‹ˆ๋ผ, ํ˜ˆ๊ด€๋‚ด ์ดˆ์ŒํŒŒ์ƒ ํ™•์ธ๋˜๋Š” ๋™๋งฅ๊ฒฝํ™”๋ฐ˜์˜ ์งˆ์ ์œผ๋กœ ๋‚˜์œ ํŠน์„ฑ๊ณผ๋„ ๊ด€๋ จ์ด ์žˆ์—ˆ๋‹ค. QFR ๋ฐ์ดํ„ฐ๋ฅผ ํ•ด๋ถ€ํ•™์ ์ธ ๋ฐ์ดํ„ฐ์— ์ถ”๊ฐ€ํ•˜๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์€ ํ˜ˆ๊ด€๋‚ด ์ดˆ์ŒํŒŒ์ƒ ํ•ด๋ถ€ํ•™์ ์ธ ํ˜‘์ฐฉ ์™ธ์—, ๋ถˆ๋ฆฌํ•œ ๋™๋งฅ๊ฒฝํ™”๋ฐ˜์˜ ํŠน์„ฑ์„ ์˜ˆ์ธกํ•˜๋Š” ๋ฐ์— ์ฆ๋ถ„ ๊ฐ€์น˜๊ฐ€ ์žˆ์Œ์„ ํ™•์ธํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ์ด๊ฒƒ์€ QFR ์€ ํ—ˆํ˜ˆ๋ฟ ์•„๋‹ˆ๋ผ ๋™๋งฅ๊ฒฝํ™”๋ฐ˜์˜ ๋‚˜์œ ๋ชจ์–‘๊นŒ์ง€ ์˜ˆ์ธกํ•˜๋Š” ์˜ˆ์ธก๋ ฅ์ด ์žˆ์Œ์„ ๋œปํ•˜๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์ด๋‹ค.Background and Objectives: Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) is novel methods for evaluating the fractional flow reserve (FFR) without the use of an invasive coronary pressure wire and pharmacologic hyperemic agent. However, the relationship between QFR and intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) data is undetermined. The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between angiography-derived FFR and IVUS findings. Additionally, we would like to report whether the new index values obtained in QFR are helpful in predicting ischemia and the relationship between QFR and clinical outcomes in patients. Methods: All vessels enrolled in Fractional FLow Reserve And Intravascular ultrasound-guided Intervention Strategy for Clinical OUtcomes in Patients with InteRmediate Stenosis (FLAVOUR) trial were screened and analysed for QFR. Computation of QFR was performed offline by an independent core laboratory. The values of QFR โ‰ค0.80 were considered hemodynamically significant, and IVUS characteristics were divided into two groups based on a QFR value of 0.80. The final QFR was the QFR value of diagnostic coronary angiography in patients without percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and the post PCI QFR value in patients who underwent PCI. The QFR pullback curve was analyzed, % area above the QFR pullback curve (%AAC) is defined as the percentage of the area above the QFR pullback curve (AAC) to the total area๏ผปAAC/total area ร— 100 (%)๏ผฝ. The primary comparison was per-vessel diagnostic performance as assessed by area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC) of QFR โ‰ค0.80 versus %DS assessed by quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) for the diagnosis FFR of โ‰ค0.80. Secondary comparison included diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value for QFR and 3D QCA-derived % DS using invasive FFR as the reference standard. The predictive value of QFR data for the IVUS adverse characteristics was evaluated using the same method. The primary clinical endpoint of this study was target vessel failure (TVF) at 24 months after randomization, defined as composite of cardiac death, target vessel relation myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization. Results: A total of 867 vessels were able to perform QFR analysis. Per-vessel level diagnostic accuracies of QFR and 3D QCA-derived %DS โ‰ฅ50% for prediction FFR โ‰ค0.80 were 92.7%, and 52.2%, respectively. For predicting vessels with FFR โ‰ค0.80, QFR index was superior to the visual assessment, 2D or 3D-QCA data. AUC was higher for QFR compared with 2D QCA-derived % diameter stenosis (AUC 0.973 versus AUC 0.738). Vessels with QFR โ‰ค0.80 had a longer lesion length, smaller minimal lumen area and greater plaque burden compared to vessels with QFR โ‰ฅ0.80. Coronary vessels with QFR โ‰ค0.80 showed higher rates of attenuated plaque, calcified plaque, mixed plaque, plaque rupture, calcified nodule and positive remodeling and lower rates of fibrous plaque compared with those of QFR >0.80. The diagnostic accuracies of QFR for prediction IVUS anatomical stenosis and the adverse plaque characteristics were 79.0% and 59.3%, respectively. The accuracy of QFR was decreased in vessels with diffuse disease (lesion length โ‰ฅ35mm). In diffuse disease, the addition of %AACvessel to contrast QFR demonstrated a tendency of improving the discrimination and reclassification of the vessels with FFR โ‰ค0.80 (AUC from 0.898 to 0.914; NRI 0.886, p=0.011; IDI 0.053, p=0.139). The incidence of TVF at 2 years was higher in the low final QFR group (<0.92) compared with the high final QFR group (โ‰ฅ0.92) (low QFR vs. high QFR; 4.7% vs. 1.5%; HR: 3.21; 95% CI: 1.17-8.84; p=0.017). Conclusions: Lower QFR value was related to IVUS defined anatomical stenosis or IVUS defined adverse plaque. The addition of contrast QFR to anatomical data had an incremental value in discriminating FFR โ‰ค0.80, anatomical stenosis assessed by IVUS, and adverse plaque characteristics. These findings suggested that QFR can predict not only ischemic lesions but also plaque characteristics.Abstract in English i List of Figures iv Contents vi Introduction 1 Materials and Methods 4 Results 18 Discussion 61 References 73 Abstract in Korean 85๋ฐ•

    Quantification in Non-Invasive Cardiac Imaging: CT and MRI

    Get PDF

    Quantification in Non-Invasive Cardiac Imaging: CT and MRI

    Get PDF

    Diagnostic value of transmural perfusion ratio derived from dynamic CT-based myocardial perfusion imaging for the detection of haemodynamically relevant coronary artery stenosis

    Get PDF
    Objectives: To investigate the additional value of transmural perfusion ratio (TPR) in dynamic CT myocardial perfusion imaging for detection of haemodynamically significant coronary artery disease compared with fractional flow reserve (FFR). Methods: Subjects with suspected or known coronary artery disease were prospectively included and underwent a CT-MPI examination. From the CT-MPI time-point data absolute myocardial blood flow (MBF) values were temporally resolved using a hybrid deconvolution model. An absolute MBF value was measured in the suspected perfusion defect. TPR was defined as the ratio between the subendocardial and subepicardial MBF. TPR and MBF results were compared with invasive FFR using a threshold of 0.80. Results: Forty-three patients and 94 territories were analysed. The area under the receiver operator curve was larger for MBF (0.78) compared with TPR (0.65, P = 0.026). No significant differences were found in diagnostic classification between MBF and TPR with a territory-based accuracy of 77 % (67-86 %) for MBF compared with 70 % (60-81 %) for TPR. Combined MBF and TPR classification did not improve the diagnostic classification. Conclusions: Dynamic CT-MPI-based transmural perfusion ratio predicts haemodynamically significant coronary artery disease. However, diagnostic performance of dynamic CT-MPI-derived TPR is inferior to quantified MBF and has limited incremental value. Key Points: โ€ข The transmural perfusion ratio from dynamic CT-MPI predicts functional obstructive coronary artery diseaseโ€ข Performance of the transmural perfusion ratio is inferior to quantified myocardial blood flowโ€ข The incremental value of the transmural perfusion ratio is limite

    Optimizing Non-Invasive Detection of Coronary Artery Disease and Effects of Advanced Interventional Techniques for Patients with Stable Coronary Artery Disease:It is All about Myocardial Perfusion

    Get PDF
    The aim of this thesis was to (1) further optimize non-invasive detection of hemodynamically significant coronary artery disease (CAD) with coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) and myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) and to examine (2) the effect of implantation of the bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) and (3) chronic total occlusion percutaneous coronary intervention (CTO PCI). Part I showed that angiographic characteristics such as volumetric measures as well as morphological aspects of atherosclerosis as assessed by CCTA are of interest when considering the hemodynamic consequences of atherosclerosis. These findings add to luminal stenosis grading alone and aid in increasing the diagnostic accuracy of CCTA to predict hemodynamically significant CAD determined by invasive FFR. The main results of Part II indicate that implantation of the BVS is feasible however no benefit with regard to myocardial perfusion is observed during hyperemia or cold pressor testing. These findings do not support the use of BVS instead of metallic DES, especially since large randomized trials have illustrated that there is an increased risk in scaffold thrombosis during the first three years. Still, long-term outcome (>3 years) has yet to become available. The results of the studies in Part III indicate that the vast majority of patients with a CTO have significantly impaired myocardial perfusion with great effect of successful CTO PCI on recovery of myocardial perfusion and decrease of ischemic burden. Patient selection for CTO PCI should be based on expected patient benefit rather than lesion complexity

    Integration of patient-specific myocardial perfusion in CT-based FFR computations

    Get PDF
    Computed Tomography based Fractional Flow Reserve (FFRCT) is a non-invasive simulation based measure for diagnosing ischaemia causing arterial stenoses. One drawback of simulation based measures are the assumptions made that are usually based on population studies that may not apply to all patients. This study describes the fundamental characteristics to FFRCT simulations and how the simulations can be simplified where it can and where assumptions break down. The investigation starts with assessing whether the simulations can be simplified to a steady flow, whilst uncharacteristic of typical coronary blood flow, it was demonstrated that with regards to the diagnostic measures of FFR, and its variants dFFR or iFR, that steady flow was applicable, which reduces the complexity of the simulation, saving computational time and resources as well as removing uncertainty in the input assumptions.[1] The next phase of the study explored the downstream conditions of the FFRCT simulation scheme. The microvasculature is too small to resolve in CT imaging and therefore assumptions are made regarding its form and function. Whilst form function relationships of the microvasculature are well established in the literature for the structure of microvessels at rest, assumptions regarding stress or hyperaemia are used for FFRCT to simulate maximal blood flow through the coronary arteries. The investigation utilised perfusion imaging to assess the validity of this assumption and showed how variable the microvascular response to hyperaemia is, and the effect that has on FFRCT.[2][3] The last part of the study produced a novel method of estimating the microvascular response using patient metrics such as age, sex, diabetes, smoker status etc, from a training dataset of 101 patients. By using the patient-specific microvascular response, FFRCT simulations better represent the coronary artery health of the patient. On a separate dataset of 10 patients, the FFRCT measurements using this novel method was also validated against the gold standard invasive FFR and has demonstrated a better diagnostic performance (94% accuracy) than the conventional method (82% accuracy). Secondly the novel method also created a probabilistic spread of FFRCT values that may provide better utility than a strict binary measure. Whilst this novel method will require further validation with larger studies, it nevertheless has potential to address some of the current drawbacks of FFRCT methods when applied to a varied patient demographic

    Non-invasive detection and assessment of coronary stenosis from blood mean residence times.

    Get PDF
    Coronary artery stenosis is an abnormal narrowing of a coronary artery caused by an atherosclerotic lesion that reduces lumen space. Fractional flow reserve (FFR) is the gold standard method to determine the severity of coronary stenosis based on the determination of rest and hyperemic pressure fields, but requires an invasive medical procedure. Normal FFR is 1.0 and FFR RT, to account for varying volume and flow rate of individual segments. BloodRT was computed in 100 patients who had undergone the pressure-wire FFR procedure, and a threshold for BloodRT was determined to assess the physiological significance of a stenosis, analogous to the diagnostic threshold for FFR. The threshold exhibited excellent discrimination in detecting significant from non-significant stenosis compared to the gold standard pressure-wire FFR, with sensitivity of 98% and specificity of 96%. When applied to clinical practice, this could potentially allow practicing cardiologists to accurately assess and quantify the severity of coronary stenosis without resorting to invasive catheter-based techniques. The first 100 patient study required a clinically determined blood flow rate as a key model input. To create a more non-invasive process, a multiple linear regression approach was employed to determine blood flow rate entering a given artery segment. To validate this method, BloodRT was computed for a new set of 100 patients using the regression derived blood flow rate. The sensitivity and specificity were 95% and 97%, respectively, indicating similar discrimination compared to the clinically derived flow rate. The method was also applied to a succession of stenosis in series. When BloodRT of each individual stenosis was well above the threshold for significance, the cumulative effect of all stenoses led to an overall BloodRT below the threshold of hemodynamic significance
    • โ€ฆ
    corecore