Concurrent assessment of epicardial coronary artery stenosis and microvascular dysfunction using diagnostic endpoints derived from fundamental fluid dynamics principles

Journal of Invasive Cardiology

Volumn 21, Issue 10, 2009, Pages 511-517

  Banerjee, Rupak K ^a   Ashtekar, Koustubh D ^a   Effat, Mohamed A ^b   Helmy, Tarek A ^b   Kim, Edward ^d   Schneeberger, Eric W ^c   Sinha, Roy A ^a   Gottliebson, William M ^d   Back, Lloyd H ^e  

^a 705 Engineering Research Center   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI   (United States)

^d CINCINNATI CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^e CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

Catheterization; Coronary disease; Hemodynamics; Microcirculation; Stenosis

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORONARY ARTERY BLOOD FLOW; CORONARY ARTERY OBSTRUCTION; CORONARY HEMODYNAMICS; CORONARY VASCULAR RESISTANCE; EXPERIMENTAL PIG; FRACTIONAL FLOW RESERVE; MEASUREMENT; MICROANGIOPATHY; MICROCIRCULATION; MULTIPLE LINEAR REGRESSION ANALYSIS; NONHUMAN; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE;

ANGIOPLASTY, BALLOON; ANIMALS; CORONARY STENOSIS; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; DISEASE MODELS, ANIMAL; ENDPOINT DETERMINATION; HEMODYNAMICS; MICROCIRCULATION; MICROSPHERES; MICROVESSELS; MODELS, CARDIOVASCULAR; REGIONAL BLOOD FLOW; SWINE;

EID: 71549133105     PISSN: 10423931     EISSN: 15572501     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Pijls NH, van Son JA, Kirkeeide RL, et al. Experimental basis of determining maximum coronary, myocardial, and collateral blood flow by pressure measurements for assessing functional stenosis severity before and after percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. Circulation 1993;87:1354-1367.
2. Kern MJ. Coronary physiology revisited: Practical insights from the cardiac catheterization laboratory. Circulation 2000;101:1344-1351.
3. Siebes M, Verhoeff BJ, Meuwissen M, et al. Single-wire pressure and flow velocity measurement to quantify coronary stenosis hemodynamics and effects of percutaneous interventions. Circulation. 2004;109:756-762.
4. Fearon WF, Aarnoudse W, Pijls NH, et al. Microvascular resistance is not influenced by epicardial coronary artery stenosis severity: Experimental validation. Circulation 2004;109:2269-2272.
5. Verhoeff BJ, Siebes M, Meuwissen M, et al. Influence of percutaneous coronary intervention on coronary microvascular resistance index. Circulation 2005;111:76-82.
6. Fearon WF, Yeung AC, Lee DP, et al. Cost-effectiveness of measuring fractional flow reserve to guide coronary interventions. Am Heart J 2003;145:882-887.
7. Verna E, Lattanzio M, Ghiringhelli S, et al. Performing versus deferring coronary angioplasty based on functional evaluation of vessel stenosis by pressure measurements: A clinical outcome study. J Cardiovasc Med 2006;7:169-175.
8. Ng MK, Yeung AC, Fearon WF. Invasive assessment of the coronary microcirculation: Superior reproducibility and less hemodynamic dependence of index of microcirculatory resistance compared with coronary flow reserve. Circulation 2006;113:2054-2061.
9. Pijls NH, van Schaardenburgh P, Manoharan G, et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention of functionally nonsignificant stenosis: 5-year follow-up of the DEFER Study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;49:2105-2111.
10. Siebes M, Chamuleau SA, Meuwissen M, et al. Influence of hemodynamic conditions on fractional flow reserve: Parametric analysis of underlying model. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol 2002;283:H1462-H1470.
11. Spaan JA, Piek JJ, Hoffman JI, Siebes M. Physiological basis of clinically used coronary hemodynamic indices. Circulation 2006;113:446-455.
12. Blows LJ, Redwood SR. The pressure wire in practice. Heart 2007;93:419-422.
13. Gould KL, Lipscomb K, Hamilton GW. Physiologic basis for assessing critical coronary stenosis. Instantaneous flow response and regional distribution during coronary hyperemia as measures of coronary flow reserve. Am J Cardiol 1974;33:87-94.
14. Fearon WF, Balsam LB, Farouque HM, et al. Novel index for invasively assessing the coronary microcirculation. Circulation 2003;107:3129-3132.
15. Verberne HJ, Meuwissen M, Chamuleau SA, et al. Effect of simultaneous intracoronary guidewires on the predictive accuracy of functional parameters of coronary lesion severity. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol 2007;292:H2349-H2355.
16. Banerjee RK, Sinha Roy A, Back LH, et al. Characterizing momentum change and viscous loss of a hemodynamic endpoint in assessment of coronary lesions. J Biomech 2007;40:652-662.
17. Banerjee RK, Ashtekar KD, Helmy TA, et al. Hemodynamic diagnostics of epicardial coronary stenoses: In-vitro experimental and computational study. Biomed Eng Online 2008;7:24.
18. Sinha Roy A, Back MR, Khoury SF, et al. Functional and anatomical diagnosis of coronary artery stenoses. J Surg Res 2007;150:24-33. Epub 2007 Nov 29.
19. Aarnoudse W, Fearon WF, Manoharan G, et al. Epicardial stenosis severity does not affect minimal microcirculatory resistance. Circulation 2004;110:2137-2142.
20. Ashtekar KD, Kim E, Sinha Roy A, et al. Delineation of true diagnostic severity of epicardial coronary stenosis and microvascular dysfunction using alternate diagnostic indices. Proceedings of European Society of Cardiology, 2008, p. 623.
21. Neter J, Kutner MH, Wasserman W, Nachtsheim CJ. Applied Linear Statistical Models. 4th Edition. Chicago: Irwin, 1996.
22. Back LH, Kwack EY, Back MR. Flow rate-pressure drop relation in coronary angioplasty: Catheter obstruction effect. J Biomech Eng 1996;118:83-89.
23. Pijls NHJ, Bruyne BD, Peels K, et al. Measurement of fractional flow reserve to assess the functional severity of coronary-artery stenosis. N Engl J Med 1996; 334:1703-1708.
24. Idelchik IE. Handbook of Hydraulic Resistance, 3rd edition. New York: Published in arrangement with Begell House, Inc., 2003.