Departments of Imaging and Medicine and the Cedars-Sinai Heart Institute, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
J Nucl Cardiol. 2018 Feb;25(1):104-119. doi: 10.1007/s12350-015-0375-1. Epub 2015 Dec 29.
Information on coronary physiology and myocardial blood flow (MBF) in patients with suspected angina is increasingly important to inform treatment decisions. A number of different techniques including myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI), noninvasive estimation of MBF, and coronary flow reserve (CFR), as well as invasive methods for CFR and fractional flow reserve (FFR) are now readily available. However, despite their incorporation into contemporary guidelines, these techniques are still poorly understood and their interpretation to guide revascularization decisions is often inconsistent. In particular, these inconsistencies arise when there are discrepancies between the various techniques. The purpose of this article is therefore to review the basic principles, techniques, and clinical value of MPI, FFR, and CFR-with particular focus on interpreting their agreements and disagreements.
有关疑似心绞痛患者的冠状动脉生理学和心肌血流(MBF)的信息对于告知治疗决策变得越来越重要。现在有许多不同的技术,包括心肌灌注成像(MPI)、MBF 的无创估计以及冠状动脉血流储备(CFR),以及用于 CFR 和血流储备分数(FFR)的有创方法。然而,尽管这些技术已被纳入当代指南,但它们仍未被充分理解,并且其解释以指导血运重建决策通常不一致。特别是,当各种技术之间存在差异时,就会出现这些不一致。因此,本文的目的是回顾 MPI、FFR 和 CFR 的基本原理、技术和临床价值,特别关注解释它们的一致性和差异性。