CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Fractional Flow Reserve

Abstract

Recommended Article

Diagnostic Accuracy of Angiography-Based Quantitative Flow Ratio Measurements for Online Assessment of Coronary Stenosis Fractional flow reserve versus angiography for guidance of PCI in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (FAME): 5-year follow-up of a randomised controlled trial Accuracy of Fractional Flow Reserve Derived From Coronary Angiography Physiologic Characteristics and Clinical Outcomes of Patients With Discordance Between FFR and iFR Sex Differences in Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio or Fractional Flow Reserve–Guided Revascularization Strategy Real-world clinical utility and impact on clinical decision-making of coronary computed tomography angiography-derived fractional flow reserve: lessons from the ADVANCE Registry Long-term clinical outcome after fractional flow reserve-guided treatment in patients with angiographically equivocal left main coronary artery stenosis Diagnostic accuracy of fractional flow reserve from anatomic CT angiography
|<< 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ...>>|

Original Research2011 Jan;6(6):768-72.

JOURNAL：EuroIntervention. Article Link

Assessment of the coronary calcification by optical coherence tomography

Kume T, Okura H, Kawamoto T et al. Keywords: coronary artery disease; IVUS; OCT

ABSTRACT

AIMS - Optical coherence tomography (OCT) can delineate calcified plaque without artefacts. The aim of this study was to evaluate the ability of OCT to quantify calcified plaque in ex vivo human coronary arteries.

METHODS AND RESULTS - Ninety-one coronary segments from 33 consecutive human cadavers were examined. By intravascular ultrasound (IVUS), 32 superficial calcified plaques, defined as the leading edge of the acoustic shadowing appears within the most shallow 50% of the plaque plus media thickness, were selected and compared with corresponding OCT and histological examinations. The area of calcification was measured by planimetry. IVUS significantly underestimated the area of calcification compared with histological examination (y = 0.39x + 0.14, r = 0.78, p < 0.001). Although OCT slightly underestimated the area of calcification (y = 0.67x + 0.53, r = 0.84, p < 0.001), it showed a better correlation with histological examination than IVUS.

CONCLUSIONS - Both OCT and IVUS underestimated the area of calcification, but OCT estimates of the area of calcification were more accurate than those estimated by IVUS. Thus, OCT may be a more useful clinical tool to quantify calcified plaque.
>CBS CBS 2019

> CBS 2019 REGISTRATION

> CBS 2019 PROGRAM

> CBS 2019 CALL FOR SCIENCE

> CBS 2019 SPOTLIGHTS

 CBSMD

> CBSMD WEBSITE REGISTRATION

> EDUCATION CENTER

> RECOMMANDED PAPER

> TOP 10 RESEARCH PAPER

> PRE-READING

CBS 2019 CBS 2019 FACULTY Education Resource CBSMD Scientific Library
Copyright ⓒ CBS MD Nanjing China. All rights reserved. 京ICP备16025898号-11
联系我们| Top