作者: Maria A.C. Christou , George C.M. Siontis , Demosthenes G. Katritsis , John P.A. Ioannidis
DOI: 10.1016/J.AMJCARD.2006.09.092
关键词: Coronary circulation 、 Fractional flow reserve 、 Concordance 、 Scintigraphy 、 Perfusion 、 Medicine 、 Internal medicine 、 Confidence interval 、 Medical imaging 、 Vascular disease 、 Cardiology
摘要: We performed a meta-analysis of 31 studies comparing the results fractional flow reserve (FFR) against quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) and/or noninvasive imaging same lesions. Studies were retrieved from PubMed (last search February 2006). Across 18 (1,522 lesions), QCA had random effects sensitivity 78% (95% confidence interval [CI] 67 to 86) and specificity 51% CI 40 61) FFR (0.75 cutoff). Overall concordances 61% for lesions with diameter stenosis 30% 70%, 67% stenoses >70%, 95% <30%. Compared (21 studies, 1,249 76% 69 82) 71 81) by effects. Summary receiver-operator characteristic estimates similar. Most data addressed comparisons perfusion scintigraphy (976 lesions, 75%, 77%), some also available dobutamine stress echocardiography (273 82%, 74%). In conclusion, does not predict functional significance shows modest concordance tests. The prognostic implications discordant need further study.