首页> 外文OA文献 >Discordance between resting and hyperemic indices of coronary stenosis severity: the VERIFY 2 study (a comparative study of resting coronary pressure gradient, instantaneous wave-free ratio and fractional flow reserve in an unselected population referred for invasive angiography)
【2h】

Discordance between resting and hyperemic indices of coronary stenosis severity: the VERIFY 2 study (a comparative study of resting coronary pressure gradient, instantaneous wave-free ratio and fractional flow reserve in an unselected population referred for invasive angiography)

机译:冠状动脉狭窄严重程度的静息和充血指数之间的不一致性:VERIFY 2研究(静息冠状动脉压力梯度,瞬时无波比和非选择性人群中的分数流量储备的比较研究,用于有创血管造影)

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Background—Distal coronary to aortic pressure ratio (Pd/Pa) and instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) are indices of functional significance of a coronary stenosis measured without hyperemia. It has been suggested that iFR has superior diagnostic accuracy to Pd/Pa when compared with fractional flow reserve (FFR).ududWe hypothesized that in comparison with FFR, revascularization decisions based on either binary cutoff values for iFR and Pd/Pa or hybrid strategies incorporating iFR or Pd/Pa will result in similar levels of disagreement.ududMethods and Results—This is a prospective study in consecutive patients undergoing FFR for clinical indications using proprietary software to calculate iFR. We measured Pd/Pa, iFR, FFR, and hyperemic iFR. Diagnostic accuracy versus FFR ≤0.80 was calculated using binary cutoff values of ≤0.90 for iFR and ≤0.92 for Pd/Pa, and adenosine zones for iFR of 0.86 to 0.93 and Pd/Pa of 0.87 to 0.94 in the hybrid strategy. One hundred ninety-seven patients with 257 stenoses (mean diameter stenosis 48%) were studied. Using binary cutoffs, diagnostic accuracy was similar for iFR and resting Pd/Pa with misclassification rates of 21% versus 20.2% (P=0.85). In the hybrid analysis, 54% of iFR cases and 53% of Pd/Pa cases were outside the adenosine zone and rates of misclassification were 9.4% versus 11.9% (P=0.55).ududConclusions—Binary cutoff values for iFR and Pd/Pa result in misclassification of 1 in 5 lesions. Using a hybrid strategy, approximately half of the patients do not receive adenosine, but 1 in 10 lesions are still misclassified. The use of nonhyperemic indices of stenosis severity cannot be recommended for decision making in the catheterization laboratory.ududClinical Trial Registration—URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT02377310.
机译:背景—冠状动脉与主动脉的远处压力比(Pd / Pa)和无瞬时波比率(iFR)是在没有充血的情况下测得的冠状动脉狭窄的功能重要性指标。有人提出,与分数血流储备(FFR)相比,iFR的诊断准确性优于Pd / Pa。 ud ud我们假设与FFR相比,基于iFR和Pd / Pa的二值临界值的血运重建决策或结合iFR或Pd / Pa的混合策略会导致相似程度的分歧。 ud ud方法和结果-这是一项对连续进行FFR的患者进行前瞻性研究的临床指征,使用专有软件计算iFR。我们测量了Pd / Pa,iFR,FFR和充血性iFR。在混合策略中,使用iFR≤0.90和Pd / Pa≤0.92的二进制截止值和iFR为0.86至0.93的Pd / Pa和0.87至0.94的Pd / Pa的二值截止值来计算诊断准确度与FFR≤0.80的关系。研究了257例狭窄的197例患者(平均直径狭窄48%)。使用二值截止值,iFR和静息Pd / Pa的诊断准确性相似,错误分类率分别为21%和20.2%(P = 0.85)。在混合分析中,54%的iFR病例和53%的Pd / Pa病例在腺苷区之外,错误分类率分别为9.4%和11.9%(P = 0.55)。 ud ud结论– iFR和Pd / Pa导致5个病变中有1个错误分类。使用混合策略,大约一半的患者未接受腺苷,但十分之一的病变仍被错误分类。不建议在导管实验室中使用狭窄程度的非充血指数来进行决策。 ud ud临床试验注册-URL:http://www.clinicaltrials.gov。唯一标识符:NCT02377310。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

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