Erschienen in:
07.08.2019 | Original Article
Adjustment of CT-fractional flow reserve based on fluid–structure interaction underestimation to minimize 1-year cardiac events
verfasst von:
Etsuro Kato, Shinichiro Fujimoto, Kanako K. Kumamaru, Yuko O. Kawaguchi, Tomotaka Dohi, Chihiro Aoshima, Yuki Kamo, Kazuhisa Takamura, Yoshiteru Kato, Makoto Hiki, Iwao Okai, Shinya Okazaki, Shigeki Aoki, Hiroyuki Daida
Erschienen in:
Heart and Vessels
|
Ausgabe 2/2020
Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten
Abstract
The purpose of the study was to evaluate the optimal cut-off value of CT-Fractional Flow Reserve (CT-FFR) using fluid–structure interaction and how to adjust the CT-FFR’s underestimation from a standpoint of minimize 1-year cardiac events. Subjects were 38 cases with 44 vessels in which stenosis of 30–90% was detected using one-rotation scanning by 320-row coronary CT angiography (CCTA) and invasive FFR (i-FFR) was performed within subsequent 90 days. CT-FFR was calculated using on-site from the multiple cardiac phases. A hypothetical 1-year cardiac event incidence was estimated using previous evidences when revascularization was decided based on CT-FFR. We assessed the optimal cut-off value of CT-FFR and how to correct the CT-FFR to minimize hypothetical cardiac events under four different disease prevalence (20%, 25%, 30%, 35%, and 40%). A total of 16 vessels had i-FFR ≤ 0.8. On per-patient basis, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predict value, negative predict value, and diagnostic accuracy of CT-FFR ≦ 0.8 vs CCTA > 50% to detect functional stenosis defined as invasive FFR ≦ 0.80 were 93.3% vs 73.3%, 73.9% vs 26.1%, 70.0% vs 39.3%, 94.4% vs 60.0%, and 81.6% vs 44.7%, respectively. For minimize 1-year cardiac events, the optimal cut-off value for more than 30% of disease prevalence was 0.80. However, the optimal cut-off value for 20, 25, and 30% was 0.54 in any cases. After the adjustment of CT-FFR using a formula of 0.3X + 0.634 for CT-FFR < 0.7 to counteract its underestimation, the % reduction of the events for 20, 25, 30, 35, and 40% at a 0.80 cut-off were 19.0%, 15.6%, 12.6%, 10.0%, and 7.7% respectively. It was reasonable to support that the optimal cut-off value was 0.80 in disease prevalence of more than 30% for minimize 1-year cardiac events. However, underestimation should be adjusted to reduce cardiac events, especially when disease prevalence is low.