Title |
Validation of pressure gradient and peripheral fractional flow reserve measured by a pressure wire for diagnosis of iliofemoral artery disease with intermediate stenosis
|
---|---|
Published in |
Medical Devices : Evidence and Research, November 2015
|
DOI | 10.2147/mder.s83768 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Naotaka Murata, Hideaki Aihara, Yoshimitu Soga, Yusuke Tomoi, Seiichi Hiramori, Yohei Kobayashi, Kei Ichihashi, Nobuhiro Tanaka, Hiroyoshi Yokoi |
Abstract |
To examine the pressure gradient and peripheral fractional flow reserve (pFFR) measured by a pressure wire as indicators of hemodynamic significance in iliofemoral angiographic intermediate stenosis. The utility of pressure measurements using a pressure wire with vasodilators is unclear in cases with intermediate iliofemoral stenosis. The mean pressure gradient (MPG) and mean pressure ratio (MPR) were measured at baseline and after injection of isosorbide dinitrate in 23 lesions with angiographically intermediate iliofemoral stenosis. Patients with complex lesions, infrapopliteal artery lesions, chronic total occlusion, and surgical bypass grafts were excluded. Hyperemic MPR was considered equivalent to pFFR. Changes in parameters in response to vasodilators were assessed and correlations of peak systolic velocity ratio (PSVR) with hyperemic MPG and pFFR were examined using duplex ultrasound. After injection of isosorbide dinitrate, hyperemic MPG increased significantly (from 9.0±5.7 to 16.3±6.2 mmHg; P<0.05) and hyperemic MPR (pFFR) decreased significantly (from 0.92±0.06 to 0.81±0.07; P<0.05). PSVR was significantly correlated with hyperemic MPG (R=0.52; P<0.05) and pFFR (R=-0.50; P<0.05). The optimal cut-off value of pFFR as an indicator of significant hemodynamic stenosis (PSVR >2.5) was 0.85 (area under the curve 0.72; sensitivity 94%; specificity 50%, P<0.05). pFFR measured using a pressure wire is reliable for prediction of hemodynamic significance in iliofemoral intermediate stenosis. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United States | 1 | 33% |
Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United States | 1 | 3% |
Unknown | 29 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Master | 7 | 23% |
Researcher | 3 | 10% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 10% |
Student > Bachelor | 2 | 7% |
Other | 2 | 7% |
Other | 3 | 10% |
Unknown | 10 | 33% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 50% |
Engineering | 2 | 7% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 3% |
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 3% |
Unknown | 11 | 37% |