How do thermodilution-derived indexes of coronary physiology compare to Doppler flow velocity-derived indexes in patients undergoing coronary flow measurements?
Thermodilution-derived CFR using a threshold of <2.5 yields reasonable diagnostic accuracy compared to Doppler, though microvascular resistance indexes correlate weakly between the two modalities.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare Doppler flow velocity and thermodilution-derived indexes and to determine the optimal thermodilution-based diagnostic thresholds for coronary flow reserve (CFR). BACKGROUND: The majority of clinical data and diagnostic thresholds for flow-based indexes are derived from Doppler measurements, and correspondence with thermodilution-derived indices remain unclear. METHODS: An international multicenter registry was conducted among patients who had coronary flow measurements using both Doppler and thermodilution techniques in the same vessel and during the same procedure. RESULTS: · s) and index of microvascular resistance (≥25). CONCLUSIONS: threshold of 2.0 has poor sensitivity for identifying vessels with diminished CFR, but using the same binary diagnostic threshold as for Doppler (<2.5) yields reasonable diagnostic accuracy. There was only a weak correlation between microvascular resistance indexes assessed by the 2 modalities.
Demir et al. (Sun,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: