...
首页> 外文期刊>Advances in Interventional Cardiology: Postepy w Kardiologii Interwencyjnej >The ongoing search for simplifying fractional flow reserve assessment: the role of contrast medium
【24h】

The ongoing search for simplifying fractional flow reserve assessment: the role of contrast medium

机译:正在进行的简化分流储备评估的探索:造影剂的作用

获取原文
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

The current knowledge on the pathophysiology of coronary artery stenosis stems from the seminal studies by Lance Gould, who first described the pressure/flow/resistance characteristics, defining the coronary flow reserve as the ratio between hyperaemic and basal flow [1]. From the beginning it was clear, indeed, that this technique had several major limitations, and therefore the concept of fractional flow reserve (FFR) was introduced. The FFR was defined as the ratio of two flows, calculated from two pressure values, obtained during maximal hyperaemia [2]. Consequently, the achievement of hyperaemia is the crucial prerequisite to assess FFR correctly. In this regard, the administration of intravenous (i.v.) adenosine is still considered the gold standard. Even so, the correct achievement of maximal hyperaemia has been acknowledged as one of the major challenges of this technique, leading to significant FFR underutilization worldwide [3]. Indeed, i.v. adenosine is perceived as a time-consuming, relatively expensive tool, relatively uncomfortable for the patient. In order to circumvent, at least partially, these limitations, the vast majority of interventional cardiologists prefers the intracoronary (i.c.) route of administration, even in highly skilled centres [4]. However, the most favourable dose of adenosine to be administered is still a matter of debate. Our group has previously demonstrated that only a high dose bolus of 600 μg of i.c. adenosine has an effect on FFR comparable to the i.v. route, but this is achieved at a higher risk of atrioventricular (AV) block [5]. For this reason, we suggested to perform increasing boli of i.c. adenosine up to 600 μg, switching to the i.v. route in case of AV block. Recently, Adjedj et al. suggested that the best combination of hyperaemia and safety could be achieved by injecting 200 μg of adenosine in the left coronary artery (LCA) and 100 μg in the right [6]. However, these doses are still associated with a significant rate of AV block without reaching maximal hyperaemia. If adenosine still has some drawbacks, other potentially valuable vasodilator agents do not perform better [7]. For these reasons, adenosine-free pressure-derived indices were proposed over the last years. In 2010 Mamas et al. proposed the simple resting Pd/Pa value to predict positivity of FFR. Pd/Pa was demonstrated to be significantly correlated with FFR and relatively accurate in predicting a positive FFR with an area... View full text...
机译:目前关于冠状动脉狭窄的病理生理知识来自Lance Gould的开创性研究,他首先描述了压力/血流/阻力特征,将冠状动脉血流储备定义为高血流与基础血流之比[1]。实际上,从一开始就很明显,该技术有几个主要局限性,因此引入了分流储备(FFR)的概念。 FFR定义为最大充血期间从两个压力值计算得出的两个流量之比[2]。因此,充血是正确评估FFR的关键前提。在这方面,静脉内(i.v.)腺苷的给药仍被认为是金标准。即便如此,最大的充血的正确实现已被认为是该技术的主要挑战之一,导致全球范围内FFR的利用率不足[3]。确实,i.v。腺苷被认为是一种耗时,相对昂贵的工具,对于患者而言相对不舒服。为了至少部分地规避这些局限性,即使在技术娴熟的中心,绝大多数介入心脏病专家更喜欢采用冠状动脉内(i.c.)给药途径。但是,腺苷的最佳剂量仍是争论的焦点。我们的小组以前已经证明,只有600μg的i.c高剂量推注。腺苷对FFR的作用与静脉注射相当途径,但这是在房室传导阻滞风险较高的情况下实现的[5]。因此,我们建议增加i.c.腺苷至600μg,切换至静脉AV块的情况下路由。最近,Adjedj等人。提示通过在左冠状动脉(LCA)中注射200μg腺苷和在右冠状动脉中注射100μg腺苷可以实现充血与安全性的最佳结合[6]。但是,这些剂量仍与明显的AV阻滞相关,而未达到最大的充血。如果腺苷仍然有一些缺点,那么其他潜在有价值的血管扩张药就不会表现更好[7]。由于这些原因,最近几年提出了无腺苷的压力衍生指数。 2010年,Mamas等人。提出了简单的静息Pd / Pa值来预测FFR阳性。 Pd / Pa被证明与FFR显着相关,并且在预测阳性FFR时相对准确,且相对面积较高。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号