Publication

Intracoronary Doppler assessment of moderate coronary artery disease: comparison with 201Tl imaging and coronary angiography. FACTS Study Group

Heller, Louis I.
Cates, Christopher
Popma, Jeffrey
Deckelbaum, Lawrence I.
Joye, James D.
Dahlberg, Seth T.
Villegas, Bernard J.
Arnold, Anita
Kipperman, Robert
Grinstead, W. Carter
... show 5 more
Embargo Expiration Date
Abstract

BACKGROUND: Coronary angiography may not reliably predict whether a stenosis causes exercise-induced ischemia. Intracoronary Doppler ultrasound may enhance diagnostic accuracy by providing a physiological assessment of stenosis severity. The goal of this study was to compare intracoronary Doppler ultrasound with both 201Tl imaging and coronary angiography.

METHODS AND RESULTS: Fifty-five patients with 67 stenotic coronary arteries underwent coronary angiography with intracoronary Doppler ultrasound and had exercise 201Tl testing within a 1-week period. Coronary flow reserve was measured, and analyses were performed by independent core laboratories. The mean stenosis was 59+/-12%; 51 of 67 stenoses were intermediate in severity (40% to 70%). A coronary flow reserve < 1.7 predicted the presence of a stress 201Tl defect in 56 of 67 stenoses (agreement=84%; kappa=0.67; 95% CI=0.48 to 0.86). In the patients who achieved 75% of their predicted maximum heart rate, the Doppler and 201Tl imaging data agreed in 46 of 52 stenoses (agreement=88%; kappa=0.77; 95%CI=0.57 to 0.97). Scatter was evident when angiography was compared with coronary flow reserve (r=.43), and the angiogram did not reliably predict the results of the 201Tl stress test (kappa=0.21; agreement=57% to 63%).

CONCLUSIONS: Doppler-derived coronary flow reserve accurately predicts the presence of exercise-induced ischemia on stress 201Tl imaging, and coronary angiography does not reliably assess the physiological significance of an intermediate coronary stenosis.

Source

Circulation. 1997 Jul 15;96(2):484-90.

Year of Medical School at Time of Visit
Sponsors
Dates of Travel
DOI
PubMed ID
9244216
Other Identifiers
Notes
Funding and Acknowledgements
Corresponding Author
Related Resources
Related Resources
Repository Citation
Rights
Distribution License