Journal
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION
Volume 308, Issue 12, Pages 1237-1245Publisher
AMER MEDICAL ASSOC
DOI: 10.1001/2012.jama.11274
Keywords
-
Categories
Funding
- GE Healthcare
- Philips Medical
- Heart-Flow
- Siemens Medical Systems
- Lantheus Medical Imaging and stock options in Spectrum Dynamics
- Roche
- Pfizer
- Abbott Vascular
- Medtronic
- Cordis
- Abbott
- Boston Scientific
- Eli Lilly
- Daiichi Sankyo
- Bristol-Myers Squibb
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Context Coronary computed tomographic (CT) angiography is a noninvasive anatomic test for diagnosis of coronary stenosis that does not determine whether a stenosis causes ischemia. In contrast, fractional flow reserve (FFR) is a physiologic measure of coronary stenosis expressing the amount of coronary flow still attainable despite the presence of a stenosis, but it requires an invasive procedure. Noninvasive FFR computed from CT (FFRCT) is a novel method for determining the physiologic significance of coronary artery disease (CAD), but its ability to identify ischemia has not been adequately examined to date. Objective To assess the diagnostic performance of FFRCT plus CT for diagnosis of hemodynamically significant coronary stenosis. Design, Setting, and Patients Multicenter diagnostic performance study involving 252 stable patients with suspected or known CAD from 17 centers in 5 countries who underwent CT, invasive coronary angiography (ICA), FFR, and FFRCT between October 2010 and October 2011. Computed tomography, ICA, FFR, and FFRCT were interpreted in blinded fashion by independent core laboratories. Accuracy of FFRCT plus CT for diagnosis of ischemia was compared with an invasive FFR reference standard. Ischemia was defined by an FFR or FFRCT of 0.80 or less, while anatomically obstructive CAD was defined by a stenosis of 50% or larger on CT and ICA. Main Outcome Measures The primary study outcome assessed whether FFRCT plus CT could improve the per-patient diagnostic accuracy such that the lower boundary of the 1-sided 95% confidence interval of this estimate exceeded 70%. Results Among study participants, 137 (54.4%) had an abnormal FFR determined by ICA. On a per-patient basis, diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of FFRCT plus CT were 73% (95% CI, 67%78%), 90% (95% CI, 84%-95%), 54% (95% CI, 46%-83%), 67% (95% CI, 60%74%), and 84% (95% CI, 74%-90%), respectively. Compared with obstructive CAD diagnosed by CT alone (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC], 0.68; 95% CI, 0.62-0.74), FFRCT was associated with improved discrimination (AUC, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.75-0.86; P<.001). Conclusion Although the study did not achieve its prespecified primary outcome goal for the level of per-patient diagnostic accuracy, use of noninvasive FFRCT plus CT among stable patients with suspected or known CAD was associated with improved diagnostic accuracy and discrimination vs CT alone for the diagnosis of hemodynamically significant CAD when FFR determined at the time of ICA was the reference standard. JAMA. 2012;308(12):1237-1245 Published online August 26, 2012. doi: 10.1001/2012.jama.11274 www.jama.com
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available