Back to Search Start Over

Non‐invasive procedural planning using computed tomography‐derived fractional flow reserve

Authors :
Ruben W. de Winter
Henk Everaars
Pepijn A. van Diemen
Paul Knaapen
Charles A. Taylor
Niels J.W. Verouden
Peter M. van de Ven
Roel S. Driessen
Stefan P. Schumacher
M P Opolski
Alexander Nap
Michiel J. Bom
Jonathon Leipsic
Albert C. van Rossum
Ralf Sprengers
Ibrahim Danad
Cardiology
ACS - Atherosclerosis & ischemic syndromes
Radiology and nuclear medicine
ACS - Heart failure & arrhythmias
Source :
Bom, M J, Schumacher, S P, Driessen, R S, van Diemen, P A, Everaars, H, de Winter, R W, van de Ven, P M, van Rossum, A C, Sprengers, R W, Verouden, N J W, Nap, A, Opolski, M P, Leipsic, J A, Danad, I, Taylor, C A & Knaapen, P 2021, ' Non-invasive procedural planning using computed tomography-derived fractional flow reserve ', Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions, vol. 97, no. 4, pp. 614-622 . https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.29210, Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions, Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions, 97(4), 614-622. Wiley-Liss Inc.
Publication Year :
2020
Publisher :
Wiley, 2020.

Abstract

Objectives: This study aimed to investigate the performance of computed tomography derived fractional flow reserve based interactive planner (FFRCT planner) to predict the physiological benefits of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) as defined by invasive post-PCI FFR. Background: Advances in FFRCT technology have enabled the simulation of hyperemic pressure changes after virtual removal of stenoses. Methods: In 56 patients (63 vessels) invasive FFR measurements before and after PCI were obtained and FFRCT was calculated using pre-PCI coronary CT angiography. Subsequently, FFRCT and invasive coronary angiography models were aligned allowing virtual removal of coronary stenoses on pre-PCI FFRCT models in the same locations as PCI was performed. Relationships between invasive FFR and FFRCT, between post-PCI FFR and FFRCT planner, and between delta FFR and delta FFRCT were evaluated. Results: Pre PCI, invasive FFR was 0.65 ± 0.12 and FFRCT was 0.64 ± 0.13 (p =.34) with a mean difference of 0.015 (95% CI: −0.23–0.26). Post-PCI invasive FFR was 0.89 ± 0.07 and FFRCT planner was 0.85 ± 0.07 (p CT were 0.23 ± 0.12 and 0.21 ± 0.12 (p =.09) with a mean difference of 0.025 (95% CI: −0.20–0.25). Significant correlations were found between pre-PCI FFR and FFRCT (r = 0.53, p CT planner (r = 0.41, p =.001), and between delta FFR and delta FFRCT (r = 0.57, p CT planner tool demonstrated significant albeit modest agreement with post-PCI FFR and change in FFR values after PCI. The FFRCT planner tool may hold promise for PCI procedural planning; however, improvement in technology is warranted before clinical application.

Details

ISSN :
1522726X and 15221946
Volume :
97
Database :
OpenAIRE
Journal :
Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions
Accession number :
edsair.doi.dedup.....3a76ca501365515ba4e71a70cfbc8700
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.29210