Transthoracic Doppler echocardiography compared with positron emission tomography for assessment of coronary microvascular dysfunction: The iPOWER study
Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift › Tidsskriftartikel › Forskning › fagfællebedømt
Standard
Transthoracic Doppler echocardiography compared with positron emission tomography for assessment of coronary microvascular dysfunction : The iPOWER study. / Michelsen, Marie Mide; Mygind, Naja Dam; Pena, Adam; Olsen, Rasmus Huan; Christensen, Thomas Emil; Ghotbi, Adam Ali; Hasbak, Philip; Kjaer, Andreas; Gustafsson, Ida; Hansen, Peter Riis; Hansen, Henrik Steen; Høst, Nis; Kastrup, Jens; Prescott, Eva.
I: International Journal of Cardiology, Bind 228, 01.02.2017, s. 435-443.Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift › Tidsskriftartikel › Forskning › fagfællebedømt
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Author
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Transthoracic Doppler echocardiography compared with positron emission tomography for assessment of coronary microvascular dysfunction
T2 - The iPOWER study
AU - Michelsen, Marie Mide
AU - Mygind, Naja Dam
AU - Pena, Adam
AU - Olsen, Rasmus Huan
AU - Christensen, Thomas Emil
AU - Ghotbi, Adam Ali
AU - Hasbak, Philip
AU - Kjaer, Andreas
AU - Gustafsson, Ida
AU - Hansen, Peter Riis
AU - Hansen, Henrik Steen
AU - Høst, Nis
AU - Kastrup, Jens
AU - Prescott, Eva
N1 - Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
PY - 2017/2/1
Y1 - 2017/2/1
N2 - BACKGROUND: Coronary microvascular function can be assessed by transthoracic Doppler echocardiography as a coronary flow velocity reserve (TTDE CFVR) and by positron emission tomography as a myocardial blood flow reserve (PET MBFR). PET MBFR is regarded the noninvasive reference standard for measuring coronary microvascular function but has limited availability. We compared TTDE CFVR with PET MBFR in women with angina pectoris and no obstructive coronary artery disease and assessed repeatability of TTDE CFVR.METHODS: From a cohort of women with angina and no obstructive coronary artery stenosis at invasive coronary angiography, TTDE CFVR by dipyridamole induced stress and MBFR by rubidium-82 PET with adenosine was successfully measured in 107 subjects. Repeatability of TTDE CFVR was assessed in 10 symptomatic women and in 10 healthy individuals.RESULTS: MBFR was systematically higher than CFVR. Median MBFR (interquartile range, IQR) was 2.68 (2.29-3.10) and CFVR (IQR) was 2.31 (1.89-2.72). Pearson's correlation coefficient was 0.36 (p<0.01). Limits of agreement (2·standard deviation) assessed by the Bland-Altman (confidence interval, CI) method was 1.49 (1.29;1.69) and unaffected by time-interval between examinations. Results were similar when adjusting for rate pressure product or focusing on perfusion of the left anterior descending artery region. Limits of agreement (CI) for repeated CFVR in 10 healthy individuals and in 10 women with angina was 0.44 (0.21;0.68) and 0.48 (0.22; 0.74), respectively.CONCLUSION: CFVR had a good repeatability, but the agreement between CFVR and MBFR was modest. Divergence could be due to methodology differences; TTDE estimates flow velocities whereas PET estimates myocardial blood flow.
AB - BACKGROUND: Coronary microvascular function can be assessed by transthoracic Doppler echocardiography as a coronary flow velocity reserve (TTDE CFVR) and by positron emission tomography as a myocardial blood flow reserve (PET MBFR). PET MBFR is regarded the noninvasive reference standard for measuring coronary microvascular function but has limited availability. We compared TTDE CFVR with PET MBFR in women with angina pectoris and no obstructive coronary artery disease and assessed repeatability of TTDE CFVR.METHODS: From a cohort of women with angina and no obstructive coronary artery stenosis at invasive coronary angiography, TTDE CFVR by dipyridamole induced stress and MBFR by rubidium-82 PET with adenosine was successfully measured in 107 subjects. Repeatability of TTDE CFVR was assessed in 10 symptomatic women and in 10 healthy individuals.RESULTS: MBFR was systematically higher than CFVR. Median MBFR (interquartile range, IQR) was 2.68 (2.29-3.10) and CFVR (IQR) was 2.31 (1.89-2.72). Pearson's correlation coefficient was 0.36 (p<0.01). Limits of agreement (2·standard deviation) assessed by the Bland-Altman (confidence interval, CI) method was 1.49 (1.29;1.69) and unaffected by time-interval between examinations. Results were similar when adjusting for rate pressure product or focusing on perfusion of the left anterior descending artery region. Limits of agreement (CI) for repeated CFVR in 10 healthy individuals and in 10 women with angina was 0.44 (0.21;0.68) and 0.48 (0.22; 0.74), respectively.CONCLUSION: CFVR had a good repeatability, but the agreement between CFVR and MBFR was modest. Divergence could be due to methodology differences; TTDE estimates flow velocities whereas PET estimates myocardial blood flow.
U2 - 10.1016/j.ijcard.2016.11.004
DO - 10.1016/j.ijcard.2016.11.004
M3 - Journal article
C2 - 27870973
VL - 228
SP - 435
EP - 443
JO - International Journal of Cardiology
JF - International Journal of Cardiology
SN - 0167-5273
ER -
ID: 173125610