JACC. Cardiovascular interventions · 2018
Sex Differences in Adenosine-Free Coronary Pressure Indexes: A CONTRAST Substudy.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНаблюдательное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Shah Sonia V, Zimmermann Frederik M, Johnson Nils P, Nishi Takeshi, Kobayashi Yuhei, Witt Nils, Berry Colin, Jeremias Allen, Koo Bon-Kwon, Esposito Giovanni, Rioufol Gilles, Park Seung-Jung, Oldroyd Keith G, Barbato Emanuele, Pijls Nico H J, De Bruyne Bernard, Fearon William F, CONTRAST Study Investigators
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study was to investigate sex differences in adenosine-free coronary pressure indexes.
BACKGROUND: Several adenosine-free coronary pressure wire indexes have been proposed to assess the functional significance of coronary artery lesions; however, there is a theoretical concern that sex differences may affect diagnostic performance because of differences in resting flow and distal myocardial mass.
METHODS: In this CONTRAST (Can Contrast Injection Better Approximate FFR Compared to Pure Resting Physiology?) substudy, contrast fractional flow reserve (cFFR), obtained during contrast-induced submaximal hyperemia, the instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR), and distal/proximal coronary pressure ratio (Pd/Pa) were compared with fractional flow reserve (FFR) in 547 men and 216 women. Using FFR ≤0.8 as a reference, the diagnostic performance of each index was compared.
RESULTS: Men and women had similar diameter stenosis (p = 0.78), but women were less likely to have FFR ≤0.80 than men (42.5% vs. 51.5%, p = 0.04). Sensitivity was similar among cFFR, iFR, and Pd/Pa when comparing women and men, respectively (cFFR, 77.5% vs. 75.3%; p = 0.69; iFR, 84.9% vs. 79.4%; p = 0.30; Pd/Pa, 78.8% vs. 77.3%; p = 0.78). cFFR was more specific than iFR or Pd/Pa regardless of sex (cFFR, 94.3% vs. 95.8%; p = 0.56; iFR, 75.6% vs. 80.1%; p = 0.38; Pd/Pa, 80.6% vs. 78.7%; p = 0.69). By receiver-operating characteristic curve analysis, cFFR provided better diagnostic accuracy than resting indexes irrespective of sex (p ≤ 0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: Despite the theoretical concern, the diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of cFFR, iFR, and Pd/Pa did not differ between the sexes. Irrespective of sex, cFFR provides the best diagnostic performance.
BACKGROUND: Several adenosine-free coronary pressure wire indexes have been proposed to assess the functional significance of coronary artery lesions; however, there is a theoretical concern that sex differences may affect diagnostic performance because of differences in resting flow and distal myocardial mass.
METHODS: In this CONTRAST (Can Contrast Injection Better Approximate FFR Compared to Pure Resting Physiology?) substudy, contrast fractional flow reserve (cFFR), obtained during contrast-induced submaximal hyperemia, the instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR), and distal/proximal coronary pressure ratio (Pd/Pa) were compared with fractional flow reserve (FFR) in 547 men and 216 women. Using FFR ≤0.8 as a reference, the diagnostic performance of each index was compared.
RESULTS: Men and women had similar diameter stenosis (p = 0.78), but women were less likely to have FFR ≤0.80 than men (42.5% vs. 51.5%, p = 0.04). Sensitivity was similar among cFFR, iFR, and Pd/Pa when comparing women and men, respectively (cFFR, 77.5% vs. 75.3%; p = 0.69; iFR, 84.9% vs. 79.4%; p = 0.30; Pd/Pa, 78.8% vs. 77.3%; p = 0.78). cFFR was more specific than iFR or Pd/Pa regardless of sex (cFFR, 94.3% vs. 95.8%; p = 0.56; iFR, 75.6% vs. 80.1%; p = 0.38; Pd/Pa, 80.6% vs. 78.7%; p = 0.69). By receiver-operating characteristic curve analysis, cFFR provided better diagnostic accuracy than resting indexes irrespective of sex (p ≤ 0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: Despite the theoretical concern, the diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of cFFR, iFR, and Pd/Pa did not differ between the sexes. Irrespective of sex, cFFR provides the best diagnostic performance.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
AdenosineAgedArterial PressureCardiac CatheterizationCardiac CathetersContrast MediaCoronary Artery DiseaseCoronary StenosisFemaleFractional Flow Reserve, MyocardialHumansHyperemiaMaleMiddle AgedPredictive Value of TestsProspective StudiesReproducibility of ResultsSex FactorsTransducers, PressureVasodilator Agents