Suppr超能文献

中国医师目测评估与定量冠状动脉造影评估狭窄严重程度的比较。

Comparison of Physician Visual Assessment With Quantitative Coronary Angiography in Assessment of Stenosis Severity in China.

机构信息

National Clinical Research Center of Cardiovascular Diseases, State Key Laboratory of Cardiovascular Disease and Division of Cardiology, Fuwai Hospital, National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, People's Republic of China.

Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, United States.

出版信息

JAMA Intern Med. 2018 Feb 1;178(2):239-247. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2017.7821.

Abstract

IMPORTANCE

Although physician visual assessment (PVA) of stenosis severity is a standard clinical practice to support decisions for coronary revascularization, there are concerns about its accuracy.

OBJECTIVE

To compare PVA with quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) as a means of assessing stenosis severity among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in China.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A cross-sectional study (2012-2013) of a random subset of 1295 patients from the China Patient-centered Evaluative Assessment of Cardiac Events (PEACE) Prospective PCI Study was carried out. The PEACE Prospective PCI study recruited a consecutive sample of patients undergoing PCI at 35 hospitals in 18 provinces of China. The coronary angiograms of this subset of participants were reviewed using QCA by 2 independent core laboratories blinded to PVA readings.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Differences between PVA and QCA assessments of stenosis severity for lesions for which PCI was performed and variation of these differences among hospitals and physicians, stratified by the diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction (AMI).

RESULTS

In patients without AMI, the mean (SD) age was 62 (10) years, and 217 (31.5%) were women; in patients with AMI, the mean (SD) age was 60 (11) years, and 153 (25.2%) were women. The mean (SD) percent diameter stenosis by PVA was 16.0% (11.5%) greater than that by QCA in patients without AMI and 10.2% (12.3%) in those with AMI (P < .001 for both comparisons). In patients without AMI, of 837 lesions with 70% or more stenosis by PVA, 427 (50.6%) were less than 70% by QCA; in patients with AMI, similar patterns were observed to a lesser extent. Among patients without AMI, only 4 (0.47%) lesions were additionally assessed with fractional flow reserve. Among 30 hospitals, the difference between PVA and QCA readings of stenosis severity varied from 7.6% (95% CI, 0.4%-14.7%) to 21.3% (95% CI, 17.1%-24.9%) among non-AMI patients. Across 57 physicians, this difference varied from 6.9% (95% CI, -1.4%-15.3%) to 26.4% (95% CI, 21.5%-31.4%).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

For coronary lesions treated with PCI in China, PVA reported substantially higher readings of stenosis severity than QCA, with large variation across hospitals and physicians. These findings highlight the need to improve the accuracy of information used to guide treatment decisions in catheterization laboratories.

摘要

重要性

尽管医师视觉评估(PVA)狭窄严重程度是支持冠状动脉血运重建决策的标准临床实践,但人们对其准确性仍存在担忧。

目的

比较 PVA 与定量冠状动脉造影(QCA)在评估中国经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)患者狭窄严重程度中的作用。

设计、地点和参与者:这是一项在中国 18 个省的 35 家医院连续招募的行 PCI 的患者(PEACE 前瞻性 PCI 研究)的随机亚组的横断面研究(2012-2013 年)。该研究由 2 个独立的核心实验室使用 QCA 对该亚组患者的冠状动脉造影进行评估,2 个核心实验室均对 PVA 读数不知情。

主要结局和测量

对进行 PCI 的病变进行 PVA 和 QCA 评估狭窄严重程度之间的差异,以及根据急性心肌梗死(AMI)的诊断对这些差异在医院和医师之间的变化。

结果

在无 AMI 的患者中,平均(SD)年龄为 62(10)岁,217 名(31.5%)为女性;AMI 患者的平均(SD)年龄为 60(11)岁,153 名(25.2%)为女性。无 AMI 患者的 PVA 测量的狭窄程度平均(SD)比 QCA 高 16.0%(11.5%),AMI 患者的狭窄程度平均(SD)高 10.2%(12.3%)(均<0.001)。在无 AMI 的 837 个狭窄程度≥70%的病变中,837 个病变中有 427 个(50.6%)的狭窄程度<70%,而在有 AMI 的患者中,类似的模式程度较小。在无 AMI 的患者中,只有 4 个(0.47%)病变接受了血流储备分数的额外评估。在 30 家医院中,非 AMI 患者的 PVA 和 QCA 测量的狭窄严重程度之间的差异在 7.6%(95%CI,0.4%-14.7%)到 21.3%(95%CI,17.1%-24.9%)之间变化。在 57 位医师中,这一差异在 6.9%(95%CI,-1.4%-15.3%)到 26.4%(95%CI,21.5%-31.4%)之间变化。

结论和相关性

在中国接受 PCI 治疗的冠状动脉病变中,PVA 报告的狭窄严重程度明显高于 QCA,不同医院和医师之间存在较大差异。这些发现强调需要提高用于指导导管实验室治疗决策的信息的准确性。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

7
AI in interventional cardiology: Innovations and challenges.人工智能在介入心脏病学中的应用:创新与挑战。
Heliyon. 2024 Aug 26;10(17):e36691. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e36691. eCollection 2024 Sep 15.

本文引用的文献

2
Implementing Machine Learning in Radiology Practice and Research.在放射学实践与研究中实施机器学习
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2017 Apr;208(4):754-760. doi: 10.2214/AJR.16.17224. Epub 2017 Jan 26.
9
Putting ad hoc PCI on pause.暂停临时经皮冠状动脉介入治疗。
JAMA. 2010 Nov 10;304(18):2059-60. doi: 10.1001/jama.2010.1509.

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验