Suppr超能文献

医生目测评估与定量冠状动脉造影评估狭窄严重程度的性别差异。

Sex differences in assessing stenosis severity between physician visual assessment and quantitative coronary angiography.

机构信息

Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, the Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang, Jiangxi, China; National Heart Centre Singapore, Singapore; Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore.

National Heart Centre Singapore, Singapore; Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore.

出版信息

Int J Cardiol. 2022 Feb 1;348:9-14. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2021.11.089. Epub 2021 Dec 3.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Physician visual assessment (PVA) in invasive coronary angiography (ICA) is the current clinical method to determine stenosis severity and guide percutaneous coronary intervention. This study sought to evaluate the effect of sex differences in assessing coronary stenosis severity between PVA and quantitative coronary angiography (QCA).

METHODS

209 patients with coronary artery disease (288 coronary lesions) underwent ICA and fractional flow reserve (FFR). ICA image processing including PVA and QCA was used to quantify diameter stenosis (DS). The difference of DS (ΔDS) between PVA and QCA was defined as DS-DS. DS ≥50% was considered anatomically obstructive. FFR ≤0.8 was defined as myocardial ischemia.

RESULTS

Mean ± SD age was 63 ± 9 years. There were no significant differences in DS (61.1 ± 16.3% vs 60.1 ± 18.9%) and DS (53.1 ± 12.1% vs 55.4 ± 14.3%) between females and males. However, ΔDS between PVA and QCA was higher in females (8.0 ± 10.9%) than in males (4.7 ± 10.9%) (P = 0.03). Thirty-four of 72 vessels (47.2%) in female patients and 75 of 216 vessels (34.7%) in male patients were classified differently by at least one grade using PVA compared to QCA assessment. DS and DS were negatively correlated with FFR in females (r = -0.397, r = -0.448) with an even stronger negative correlation in males (r = -0.607, r = -0.607). ROC analysis demonstrated that DS had better discrimination capability for myocardial ischemia (FFR ≤ 0.80) than DS in both sexes (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

A systematic bias was found in PVA (QCA reference) for overestimating severity of coronary artery disease in females compared to males.

摘要

背景

在经皮冠状动脉介入治疗中,医师目测评估(PVA)是目前用于判断狭窄严重程度并指导治疗的临床方法。本研究旨在评估 PVA 与定量冠状动脉造影(QCA)评估冠状动脉狭窄严重程度时的性别差异。

方法

209 例冠心病患者(288 处病变)接受冠状动脉造影和血流储备分数(FFR)检查。采用 PVA 和 QCA 对冠状动脉造影图像进行处理,以量化直径狭窄程度(DS)。PVA 和 QCA 之间的直径狭窄程度差异(ΔDS)定义为 DS-QCA。DS≥50%定义为解剖学上的阻塞性病变,FFR≤0.8 定义为心肌缺血。

结果

平均年龄(±标准差)为 63±9 岁。女性和男性之间的 DS(61.1±16.3% vs 60.1±18.9%)和 DS(53.1±12.1% vs 55.4±14.3%)无显著差异。然而,女性的 PVA 和 QCA 之间的ΔDS 高于男性(8.0±10.9% vs 4.7±10.9%)(P=0.03)。与 QCA 评估相比,72 处女性患者中有 34 处(47.2%)和 216 处男性患者中有 75 处(34.7%)至少以一个级别分类不同。DS 和 DS 与女性的 FFR 呈负相关(r=-0.397,r=-0.448),与男性的相关性更强(r=-0.607,r=-0.607)。ROC 分析表明,DS 比 DS 对女性心肌缺血(FFR≤0.80)有更好的鉴别能力(P<0.05)。

结论

与男性相比,PVA(QCA 参考标准)在评估女性冠状动脉疾病严重程度时存在系统偏差,导致高估。

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