Suppr超能文献

冠状动脉内与静脉内腺苷评估血流储备分数:系统评价和荟萃分析。

Intracoronary versus intravenous adenosine to assess fractional flow reserve: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

机构信息

Department of Medical Sciences, Division of Cardiology, AOU Città della Salute e della Scienza, University of Turin.

Division of Cardiology, Azienda Ospedaliera-Universitaria 'Maggiore della Carità,' Eastern Piedmont University, Novara.

出版信息

J Cardiovasc Med (Hagerstown). 2018 Jun;19(6):274-283. doi: 10.2459/JCM.0000000000000652.

Abstract

AIMS

Intravenous infusion of adenosine is the reference method to measure fractional flow reserve (FFR). Intracoronary boluses are often used because of time and convenience, but their effectiveness has yet to be assessed.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies directly comparing intravenous and intracoronary adenosine administration for FFR measurement. FFR values and prevalence of functionally critical lesions obtained with the different methods of adenosine administration were compared.

RESULTS

Twelve studies evaluating 781 lesions from 731 patients were included (63.7 years, 25.5% women, median FFR 0.82). FFR values were significantly lower with intravenous adenosine than with intracoronary adenosine [mean difference 0.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.00-0.02, P = 0.005], even if no significant differences were observed when only high doses of intracoronary adenosine (≥150 μg) were considered. The prevalence of functionally critical lesions did not significantly differ between intracoronary and intravenous adenosine. Concerning the use of different doses of intracoronary adenosine, low doses (≤60 μg) were associated with higher FFR values (mean difference 0.02, 95% CI 0.01-0.03, P < 0.001) and fewer functionally critical lesions (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.40-0.81, P = 0.002) compared with high doses. Meta-regression analysis did not show any significant interaction between the way of adenosine administration and main clinical features. Intracoronary adenosine was associated with a higher incidence of atrioventricular blocks, whereas angina and/or systemic symptoms were more frequent with intravenous adenosine.

CONCLUSION

Intracoronary adenosine might be as effective as intravenous adenosine to measure FFR, provided that adequate doses are used. Intracoronary adenosine represents a valuable alternative to intravenous adenosine whenever appropriately administered.

摘要

目的

静脉输注腺苷是测量血流储备分数(FFR)的参考方法。由于时间和便利性,经常使用冠状动脉内推注,但尚未评估其效果。

方法

我们对直接比较静脉内和冠状动脉内给予腺苷进行 FFR 测量的前瞻性研究进行了系统评价和荟萃分析。比较了不同腺苷给药方法获得的 FFR 值和功能临界病变的发生率。

结果

纳入了 12 项研究,共 731 例患者的 781 处病变(63.7 岁,25.5%为女性,中位 FFR 为 0.82)。与冠状动脉内给予腺苷相比,静脉内给予腺苷时 FFR 值明显较低[平均差异 0.01,95%置信区间(CI)0.00-0.02,P=0.005],即使仅考虑高剂量冠状动脉内腺苷(≥150μg)时也无显著差异。冠状动脉内和静脉内给予腺苷时功能临界病变的发生率无显著差异。关于不同剂量冠状动脉内腺苷的使用,低剂量(≤60μg)与较高的 FFR 值(平均差异 0.02,95%CI 0.01-0.03,P<0.001)和较少的功能临界病变(OR 0.57,95%CI 0.40-0.81,P=0.002)相关,与高剂量相比。元回归分析显示,腺苷给药方式与主要临床特征之间无显著交互作用。冠状动脉内给予腺苷与房室传导阻滞的发生率较高相关,而静脉内给予腺苷时心绞痛和/或全身症状更为常见。

结论

只要使用适当的剂量,冠状动脉内给予腺苷可能与静脉内给予腺苷一样有效来测量 FFR。只要适当给药,冠状动脉内给予腺苷就是静脉内给予腺苷的一种有价值的替代方法。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验