Stress Myocardial Perfusion Imaging vs CCTA for Diagnosis of Invasive Vessel-Specific Coronary Physiology: Predictive Modeling Results From the Computed Tomographic Evaluation of Atherosclerotic Determinants of Myocardial Ischemia (CREDENCE) Trial

JAMA Cardiol

26 Agosto Ago 2020 one month ago
  • Pontone G, Andreini D

Stress imaging has been the standard for diagnosing functionally significant coronary artery disease. It is unknown whether novel, atherosclerotic plaque measures improve accuracy beyond coronary stenosis for diagnosing invasive fractional flow reserve (FFR) measurement. Aim of this study was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of comprehensive anatomic (obstructive and nonobstructive atherosclerotic plaque) vs functional imaging measures for estimating vessel-specific FFR.

Reference

Stuijfzand WJ, van Rosendael AR, Lin FY, Chang HJ, van den Hoogen IJ, Gianni U, Choi JH, Doh JH, Her AY, Koo BK, Nam CW, Park HB, Shin SH, Cole J, Gimelli A, Khan MA, Lu B, Gao Y, Nabi F, Nakazato R, Schoepf UJ, Driessen RS, Bom MJ, Thompson R, Jang JJ, Ridner M, Rowan C, Avelar E, Généreux P, Knaapen P, de Waard GA, Pontone G, Andreini D, Al-Mallah MH, Lu Y, Berman DS, Narula J, Min JK, Bax JJ, Shaw LJ; CREDENCE Investigators. Stress Myocardial Perfusion Imaging vs Coronary Computed Tomographic Angiography for Diagnosis of Invasive Vessel-Specific Coronary Physiology: Predictive Modeling Results From the Computed Tomographic Evaluation of Atherosclerotic Determinants of Myocardial Ischemia (CREDENCE) Trial. JAMA Cardiol 2020 Aug 19;e203409. doi: 10.1001/jamacardio.2020.3409

Go to PubMed