Key result
Baseline stenosis resistance index was as accurate as fractional flow reserve for detecting myocardial ischemia (AUC 0.77; 95% CI 0.71-0.83; P>0.05).
Why the study?
Does baseline stenosis resistance index provide comparable diagnostic accuracy to hyperemic parameters for detecting myocardial ischemia in patients with coronary lesions?
Observational (n=232)
Does baseline stenosis resistance index provide comparable diagnostic accuracy to hyperemic parameters for detecting myocardial ischemia in patients with coronary lesions?
Effect estimate: AUC 0.77 (95% CI 0.71-0.83)
Absolute Event Rate: 0.77% vs 0.77%
p-value: p=>0.05
Combined intracoronary pressure and flow velocity measurements during baseline conditions (baseline stenosis resistance) provide diagnostic accuracy for myocardial ischemia comparable to FFR, offering a potential alternative without requiring vasodilators.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Supports evaluation of baseline stenosis resistance as a vasodilator-free ischemia tool; leaves open its role pending prospective validation.
Hoef et al. (2012) conducted an observational in Coronary lesion severity (n=232). Baseline stenosis resistance index vs. Fractional flow reserve and coronary flow velocity reserve was evaluated on Discriminative value for myocardial ischemia on myocardial perfusion scintigraphy (AUC 0.77, 95% CI 0.71-0.83, p=>0.05). Baseline stenosis resistance index was as accurate as fractional flow reserve for detecting myocardial ischemia (AUC 0.77; 95% CI 0.71-0.83; P>0.05).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: