Key result
PET-measured longitudinal myocardial blood flow gradients demonstrated significantly lower diagnostic accuracy (56%) compared to hyperaemic myocardial blood flow (79%) for detecting haemodynamically significant coronary artery disease.
Why the study?
Does the longitudinal MBF gradient derived from [15O]H2O PET accurately diagnose haemodynamically significant CAD compared to FFR?
Cross-Sectional (n=204)
No
Does the longitudinal MBF gradient derived from [15O]H2O PET accurately diagnose haemodynamically significant CAD compared to FFR?
PET-derived longitudinal flow gradients have lower diagnostic value than hyperaemic MBF for identifying hemodynamically significant CAD, challenging its proposed utility as a novel index.
PET longitudinal MBF gradients should not guide CAD diagnosis; leaves open whether method refinements could enhance utility over hyperaemic MBF.
Aims: The longitudinal myocardial blood flow (MBF) gradient derived from positron emission tomography (PET) has been proposed as an emerging non-invasive index of haemodynamically significant coronary artery disease (CAD). This study aimed to investigate the diagnostic value of longitudinal MBF gradient for the presence of haemodynamically significant CAD. Methods and results: A total of 204 patients (603 vessels) with suspected CAD underwent [15O]H2O PET followed by invasive coronary angiography with fractional flow reserve (FFR) of all major coronary arteries. Longitudinal base-to-apex MBF gradients were assessed by two methods, using MBF in apical and mid (Method 1) or in apical and basal (Method 2) myocardial segments to calculate the gradient. The hyperaemic longitudinal MBF gradient was only weakly correlated with FFR (Method 1: r = 0.12, P = 0.02; Method 2: r = 0.22, P < 0.001). The hyperaemic longitudinal MBF gradient (by both methods), had lower diagnostic value when compared with hyperaemic MBF for the presence of haemodynamically significant CAD, defined as an FFR ≤ 0.80. No significant correlations between longitudinal MBF gradients and FFR were noted in proximal lesions, whereas longitudinal MBF gradients and FFR were significantly correlated in non-proximal lesions (r = 0.57, P < 0.001). Conclusion: PET measured longitudinal flow parameters had lower diagnostic value when compared with hyperaemic MBF for the presence of haemodynamically significant CAD. Since lesion location was found to affect the correlation of PET measured longitudinal flow parameters and FFR, presence of a longitudinal flow gradient may be partly caused by normalization to a relatively normal perfused areas.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bom et al. (2018) conducted a cross-sectional in Suspected coronary artery disease (CAD) (n=204). Longitudinal myocardial blood flow (MBF) gradient vs. Hyperaemic myocardial blood flow (MBF) was evaluated on Diagnostic accuracy for haemodynamically significant CAD (FFR ≤ 0.80) (p=<0.001). PET-measured longitudinal myocardial blood flow gradients demonstrated significantly lower diagnostic accuracy (56%) compared to hyperaemic myocardial blood flow (79%) for detecting haemodynamically significant coronary artery disease.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: