...
首页> 外文期刊>The American Journal of Cardiology >Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Performance of Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography, Computed Tomography Perfusion, and Computed Tomography-Fractional Flow Reserve in Functional Myocardial Ischemia Assessment Versus Invasive Fractional Flow Reserve
【24h】

Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Performance of Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography, Computed Tomography Perfusion, and Computed Tomography-Fractional Flow Reserve in Functional Myocardial Ischemia Assessment Versus Invasive Fractional Flow Reserve

机译:冠状动脉计算机断层扫描血管造影,计算机断层扫描灌注和计算机断层扫描-分数血流储备在功能性心肌缺血评估中与有创分数血流储备的诊断性能的荟萃分析

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

We sought to compare the diagnostic performance of coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA), computed tomography perfusion (CTP), and computed tomography (CT)-fractional flow reserve (FFR) for assessing the functional significance of coronary stenosis as defined by invasive FFR in patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease (CAD). CCTA has proved clinically useful for excluding obstructive CAD because of its high sensitivity and negative predictive value (NPV); however, the ability of CTA to identify functionally significant CAD has remained challenging. We searched PubMed/Medline for studies evaluating CCTA, CTP, or CT-FFR for the noninvasive detection of obstructive CAD compared with catheter-derived FFR as the reference standard. Pooled sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, likelihood ratios, and odds ratio of all diagnostic tests were assessed. Eighteen studies involving a total of 1,535 patients were included. CTA demonstrated a pooled sensitivity of 0.92, specificity 0.43, PPV of 0.56, and NPV of 0.87 on a per-patient level. CT-FFR and CTP increased the specificity to 0.72 and 0.77, respectively (p = 0.004 and p = 0.0009) resulting in higher point estimates for PPV 0.70 and 0.83, respectively. There was no improvement in the sensitivity. The CTP protocol involved more radiation (3.5 mSv CCTA vs 9.6 mSv CTP) and a higher volume of iodinated contrast (145 ml). In conclusion, CTP and CT-FFR improve the specificity of CCTA for detecting functionally significant stenosis as defined by invasive FFR on a per-patient level; both techniques could advance the ability to noninvasively detect the functional significance of coronary lesions. (C) 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
机译:我们试图比较冠状动脉计算机断层扫描血管造影(CCTA),计算机断层扫描灌注成像(CTP)和计算机断层扫描(CT)-分数血流储备量(FFR)的诊断性能,以评估由侵入性FFR定义的冠状动脉狭窄的功能意义。患有已知或疑似冠心病(CAD)的患者。由于CCTA具有高灵敏度和阴性预测值(NPV),因此已被证明可用于排除阻塞性CAD。但是,CTA识别具有功能重要性的CAD的能力仍然具有挑战性。我们搜索PubMed / Medline,以评估CCTA,CTP或CT-FFR与导管衍生FFR相比作为参考标准的阻塞性CAD的无创检测。评估所有诊断测试的合并敏感性,特异性,PPV,NPV,似然比和比值比。共纳入18项研究,涉及1,535名患者。 CTA在每位患者的水平上显示出汇总的敏感性为0.92,特异性为0.43,PPV为0.56,NPV为0.87。 CT-FFR和CTP分别将特异性提高到0.72和0.77(p = 0.004和p = 0.0009),导致PPV分别更高,分别为0.70和0.83。灵敏度没有改善。 CTP协议涉及更多的放射线(3.5 mSv CCTA与9.6 mSv CTP)和更大体积的碘化造影剂(145 ml)。总之,CTP和CT-FFR改善了CCTA在按患者水平由侵入性FFR定义的功能性狭窄检测中的特异性。两种技术都可以提高无创检测冠状动脉病变功能意义的能力。 (C)2015 Elsevier Inc.保留所有权利。

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