CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

血流储备分数

Abstract

Recommended Article

Fractional flow reserve derived from computed tomography coronary angiography in the assessment and management of stable chest pain: the FORECAST randomized trial Coronary fractional flow reserve in bifurcation stenoses: what have we learned? Comparison of Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography, Fractional Flow Reserve, and Perfusion Imaging for Ischemia Diagnosis Diagnostic accuracy of intracoronary optical coherence tomography-derived fractional flow reserve for assessment of coronary stenosis severity Sex Differences in Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio or Fractional Flow Reserve–Guided Revascularization Strategy The Natural History of Nonculprit Lesions in STEMI: An FFR Substudy of the Compare-Acute Trial Prognostic Implication of Functional Incomplete Revascularization and Residual Functional SYNTAX Score in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease Physiology-Based Revascularization: A New Approach to Plan and Optimize Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: State-of-the-Art Review

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.