Žuža Iva, Nadarević Tin, Jakljević Tomislav, Bartolović Nina, Kovačić Slavica
Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Clinical Hospital Centre Rijeka, 51000 Rijeka, Croatia.
Faculty of Medicine, University of Rijeka, 51000 Rijeka, Croatia.
Diagnostics (Basel). 2024 Aug 10;14(16):1738. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics14161738.
Negative CCTA can effectively exclude significant CAD, eliminating the need for further noninvasive or invasive testing. However, in the presence of severe CAD, the accuracy declines, thus necessitating additional testing. The aim of our study was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of noninvasive cFFR derived from CCTA, compared to ICA in detecting hemodynamically significant stenoses in participants with high CAC scores (>400).
This study included 37 participants suspected of having CAD who underwent CCTA and ICA. CAC was calculated and cFFR analyses were performed using an on-site machine learning-based algorithm. Diagnostic accuracy parameters of CCTA and cFFR were calculated on a per-vessel level.
The median total CAC score was 870, with an IQR of 642-1370. Regarding CCTA, sensitivity and specificity for RCA were 60% and 67% with an AUC of 0.639; a LAD of 87% and 50% with an AUC of 0.688; an LCX of 33% and 90% with an AUC of 0.617, respectively. Regarding cFFR, sensitivity and specificity for RCA were 60% and 61% with an AUC of 0.606; a LAD of 75% and 54% with an AUC of 0.647; an LCX of 50% and 77% with an AUC of 0.647. No significant differences between AUCs of coronary CTA and cFFR for each vessel were found.
Our results showed poor diagnostic accuracy of CCTA and cFFR in determining significant ischemia-related lesions in participants with high CAC scores when compared to ICA. Based on our results and study limitations we cannot exclude cFFR as a method for determining significant stenoses in people with high CAC. A key issue is accurate and detailed lumen segmentation based on good-quality CCTA images.
冠状动脉CT血管造影(CCTA)结果为阴性可有效排除严重冠状动脉疾病(CAD),无需进一步进行非侵入性或侵入性检查。然而,在存在严重CAD的情况下,其准确性会下降,因此需要额外的检查。我们研究的目的是评估与有创冠状动脉造影(ICA)相比,基于CCTA得出的无创冠状动脉血流储备分数(cFFR)在检测冠状动脉钙化(CAC)评分高(>400)的参与者中血流动力学显著狭窄方面的诊断性能。
本研究纳入了37名疑似患有CAD的参与者,他们接受了CCTA和ICA检查。计算CAC,并使用基于现场机器学习的算法进行cFFR分析。在每个血管层面计算CCTA和cFFR的诊断准确性参数。
总CAC评分的中位数为870,四分位间距为642 - 1370。关于CCTA,右冠状动脉(RCA)的敏感性和特异性分别为60%和67%,曲线下面积(AUC)为0.639;左前降支(LAD)为87%和50%,AUC为0.688;左旋支(LCX)为33%和90%,AUC为0.617。关于cFFR,RCA的敏感性和特异性分别为60%和61%,AUC为0.606;LAD为75%和54%,AUC为0.647;LCX为50%和77%,AUC为0.647。未发现各血管的冠状动脉CTA和cFFR的AUC之间存在显著差异。
我们的结果表明,与ICA相比,CCTA和cFFR在确定CAC评分高的参与者中与缺血相关的显著病变时诊断准确性较差。基于我们的结果和研究局限性,我们不能排除cFFR作为确定CAC高的人群中显著狭窄的一种方法。一个关键问题是基于高质量CCTA图像进行准确而详细的管腔分割。