Department of Cardiology, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117, Amsterdam 1081 HV, The Netherlands.
Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2023 Dec 21;25(1):116-126. doi: 10.1093/ehjci/jead197.
In chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) patients with documented coronary artery disease (CAD), ischaemia detection by myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) and an invasive approach are viable diagnostic strategies. We compared the diagnostic performance of quantitative flow ratio (QFR) with single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), positron emission tomography (PET), and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) in patients with prior CAD [previous percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and/or myocardial infarction (MI)].
This PACIFIC-2 sub-study evaluated 189 CCS patients with prior CAD for inclusion. Patients underwent SPECT, PET, and CMR followed by invasive coronary angiography with fractional flow reserve (FFR) measurements of all major coronary arteries (N = 567), except for vessels with a sub-total or chronic total occlusion. Quantitative flow ratio computation was attempted in 488 (86%) vessels with measured FFR available (FFR ≤0.80 defined haemodynamically significant CAD). Quantitative flow ratio analysis was successful in 334 (68%) vessels among 166 patients and demonstrated a higher accuracy (84%) and sensitivity (72%) compared with SPECT (66%, P < 0.001 and 46%, P = 0.001), PET (65%, P < 0.001 and 58%, P = 0.032), and CMR (72%, P < 0.001 and 33%, P < 0.001). The specificity of QFR (87%) was similar to that of CMR (83%, P = 0.123) but higher than that of SPECT (71%, P < 0.001) and PET (67%, P < 0.001). Lastly, QFR exhibited a higher area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (0.89) than SPECT (0.57, P < 0.001), PET (0.66, P < 0.001), and CMR (0.60, P < 0.001).
QFR correlated better with FFR in patients with prior CAD than MPI, as reflected in the higher diagnostic performance measures for detecting FFR-defined, vessel-specific, significant CAD.
在有冠状动脉疾病(CAD)病史的慢性冠状动脉综合征(CCS)患者中,心肌灌注成像(MPI)和有创检查都是可行的诊断策略。我们比较了定量血流比(QFR)与单光子发射计算机断层扫描(SPECT)、正电子发射断层扫描(PET)和心脏磁共振成像(CMR)在有既往 CAD(既往经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)和/或心肌梗死(MI))患者中的诊断性能。
本 PACIFIC-2 子研究纳入了 189 例有既往 CAD 的 CCS 患者。患者接受了 SPECT、PET 和 CMR 检查,然后对所有主要冠状动脉进行了有创冠状动脉造影检查,并测量了血流储备分数(FFR),但存在次全或慢性完全闭塞的血管除外。对 488 个有测量 FFR 值的血管(FFR ≤0.80 定义为血流动力学显著 CAD)尝试进行了定量血流比计算。在 166 例患者中有 334 例(68%)血管的定量血流比分析成功,与 SPECT(66%,P < 0.001 和 46%,P = 0.001)、PET(65%,P < 0.001 和 58%,P = 0.032)和 CMR(72%,P < 0.001 和 33%,P < 0.001)相比,定量血流比分析显示出更高的准确性(84%)和敏感性(72%)。QFR 的特异性(87%)与 CMR(83%,P = 0.123)相似,但高于 SPECT(71%,P < 0.001)和 PET(67%,P < 0.001)。最后,QFR 的受试者工作特征曲线下面积(AUC)高于 SPECT(0.89 对 0.57,P < 0.001)、PET(0.89 对 0.66,P < 0.001)和 CMR(0.89 对 0.60,P < 0.001)。
在有既往 CAD 的患者中,QFR 与 FFR 的相关性优于 MPI,表现在检测 FFR 定义的、血管特异性的、有意义的 CAD 方面,诊断性能更高。