Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Diastolic pressure ratio: new approach and validation vs. the instantaneous wave-free ratio.
Johnson, Nils P; Li, Wenguang; Chen, Xi; Hennigan, Barry; Watkins, Stuart; Berry, Colin; Fearon, William F; Oldroyd, Keith G.
Afiliação
  • Johnson NP; Weatherhead PET Center, Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, McGovern Medical School at UTHealth and Memorial Hermann Hospital, Houston, TX, USA.
  • Li W; Boston Scientific Corporation, CA, USA.
  • Chen X; Boston Scientific Corporation, CA, USA.
  • Hennigan B; British Heart Foundation Glasgow Cardiovascular Research Centre, Institute of Cardiovascular and Medical Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
  • Watkins S; West of Scotland Heart and Lung Centre, Golden Jubilee National Hospital, Clydebank, Agamemnon Street, Glasgow, UK.
  • Berry C; British Heart Foundation Glasgow Cardiovascular Research Centre, Institute of Cardiovascular and Medical Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
  • Fearon WF; West of Scotland Heart and Lung Centre, Golden Jubilee National Hospital, Clydebank, Agamemnon Street, Glasgow, UK.
  • Oldroyd KG; British Heart Foundation Glasgow Cardiovascular Research Centre, Institute of Cardiovascular and Medical Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Eur Heart J ; 40(31): 2585-2594, 2019 08 14.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31329863
ABSTRACT

AIMS:

The instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) and whole-cycle Pd/Pa investigate coronary physiology during non-hyperaemic conditions. To test for unique physiologic properties of the wave-free period when making resting coronary pressure measurements, we compared post hoc a diastolic pressure ratio (dPR) and Pd/Pa against iFR for numerical similarity and test/retest repeatability. METHODS AND

RESULTS:

Eight hundred and ninety-three lesions from 833 subjects were included from the VERIFY 2 and CONTRAST studies. Diastolic pressure ratio and a linear transform of Pd/Pa were compared against iFR for diagnostic performance. Mean difference between dPR and iFR [Δ = -0.006 ± 0.011, r2 = 0.993, area under receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) = 0.997] mirrored the difference of two iFR measurements repeated immediately (Δ = <0.001 ± 0.004, r2 = 0.998, AUC = 1.00). Minor variations in the definition of dPR changed its value by <1-2% over a broad range of the cardiac cycle. A linear transform of Pd/Pa showed very good diagnostic performance (Δ = -0.012 ± 0.031, r2 = 0.927, AUC = 0.979). Post hoc iFR values were validated against real-time iFR values and matched almost exactly (average Δ = <0.001 ± 0.004, 99.6% within ±0.01).

CONCLUSIONS:

Our dPR offers numerical equivalency to iFR. Despite different technical approaches for identifying the relevant period of diastole, the agreement between dPR and iFR and the insensitivity of dPR to minor variations in its definition further confirm numerical equivalency among resting metrics.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Descanso / Pressão Sanguínea / Doença da Artéria Coronariana / Vasos Coronários / Infarto do Miocárdio Tipo de estudo: Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies Limite: Aged / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2019 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Descanso / Pressão Sanguínea / Doença da Artéria Coronariana / Vasos Coronários / Infarto do Miocárdio Tipo de estudo: Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies Limite: Aged / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2019 Tipo de documento: Article