Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ Catheterization and ...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions
Article . 2025 . Peer-reviewed
License: CC BY NC
Data sources: Crossref
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
PubMed Central
Article . 2025
License: CC BY NC
Data sources: PubMed Central
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
Radboud Repository
Article . 2025
Data sources: Radboud Repository
versions View all 6 versions
addClaim

Comparison of Fractional Flow Reserve and Myocardial Perfusion Imaging in Saphenous Vein Grafts

Authors: Roel Hoek; Ruben W. de Winter; Rens T. Peters; Yvemarie B. O. Somsen; Pepijn A. van Diemen; Ruurt A. Jukema; Jos W. Twisk; +6 Authors

Comparison of Fractional Flow Reserve and Myocardial Perfusion Imaging in Saphenous Vein Grafts

Abstract

ABSTRACTBackgroundRevascularization decision‐making for saphenous vein grafts (SVGs) relies on angiographic lesion severity estimation, as studies on fractional flow reserve (FFR) for detecting ischemia in SVGs are scarce.AimsTo compare FFR and quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) of SVGs against myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) and to establish an optimal FFR threshold for SVGs.MethodsThis cross‐sectional registry study included symptomatic patients with prior coronary artery bypass grafting who underwent single‐photon emission computed tomography, positron emission tomography, or stress perfusion cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and had FFR measurements of ≥ 1 SVGs. We matched the myocardial territory supplied by the SVGs to ischemia on MPI. The optimal FFR threshold for SVGs was determined using the Youden index. Diagnostic performance measures were calculated and compared for FFR (0.80 and the optimal threshold) and for QCA (diameter stenosis ≥ 50%).ResultsThis study included 80 patients (mean age 73 ± 7 years, 68 [85%] male) with 94 SVGs, of which 38 (40%) supplied ischemic myocardium. Areas under the curve between FFR and QCA were comparable (0.73 vs. 0.65, p = 0.181). The optimal cutoff value of FFR was 0.94. FFR ≤ 0.94 showed higher sensitivity (63%) and negative predictive value (75%) compared to FFR ≤ 0.80 (32% [p < 0.001] and 64% [p = 0.007]) and QCA (37% [p = 0.002] and 65% [p = 0.021]), but with lower specificity (75%) than FFR ≤ 0.80 (84%, p = 0.021). Positive predictive value and overall accuracy were similar across all methods.ConclusionsFFR and QCA had comparable moderate diagnostic performance for detecting SVG failure determined by MPI. The optimal FFR cutoff in SVGs is higher than 0.80, resulting in higher sensitivity and negative predictive value compared to FFR ≤ 0.80 and QCA, at the expense of reduced specificity.

Country
Netherlands
Keywords

Male, coronary artery bypass grafting, Original Article ‐ Clinical Science, Coronary Angiography, Severity of Illness Index, Predictive Value of Tests, saphenous vein graft, Humans, Saphenous Vein, Registries, Coronary Artery Bypass, fractional flow reserve, Cardiology - Radboud University Medical Center, Aged, Tomography, Emission-Computed, Single-Photon, Aged, 80 and over, Myocardial Perfusion Imaging, Coronary Stenosis, Graft Occlusion, Vascular, Reproducibility of Results, myocardial perfusion imaging, Middle Aged, Fractional Flow Reserve, Myocardial, Cross-Sectional Studies, Positron-Emission Tomography, Female, coronary artery disease

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    2
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
2
Top 10%
Average
Average
Green
hybrid