Diagnostic accuracy of intravascular ultrasound-derived minimal lumen area compared with fractional flow reserve - Meta-analysis: Pooled accuracy of IVUS luminal area versus FFR

Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions

Volumn 84, Issue 3, 2014, Pages 377-385

  Nascimento, Bruno R ^a,b,c   De Sousa, Marcos R ^a   Koo, Bon Kwon ^d   Samady, Habib ^e   Bezerra, Hiram G ^f   Ribeiro, Antônio L P ^a,b   Costa, Marco A ^f  

^a FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF MINAS GERAIS   (Brazil)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SÃO PAULO   (Brazil)

^c Hospital Universitario Sao Jose   (Brazil)

^d Seoul National University College of Medicine   (South Korea)

^e EMORY UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^f UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS OF CLEVELAND   (United States)

Author keywords

coronary artery disease; fractional flow reserve; intravascular ultrasound; percutaneous coronary intervention

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AREA UNDER THE CURVE; ARTICLE; CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; DISEASE SEVERITY; FEMALE; FRACTIONAL FLOW RESERVE; FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; INTRAVASCULAR ULTRASOUND; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; META ANALYSIS; MIDDLE AGED; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; CORONARY BLOOD VESSEL; ECHOGRAPHY; ENDOSCOPIC ECHOGRAPHY; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PROCEDURES; PROGNOSIS; REPRODUCIBILITY; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX;

CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; CORONARY VESSELS; FRACTIONAL FLOW RESERVE, MYOCARDIAL; HUMANS; PROGNOSIS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX; ULTRASONOGRAPHY, INTERVENTIONAL;

EID: 84906355925     PISSN: 15221946     EISSN: 1522726X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/ccd.25047     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Pijls NH, Fearon WF, Tonino PA, Siebert U, Ikeno F, et al. Fractional flow reserve versus angiography for guiding percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease: 2-year follow-up of the FAME (Fractional flow reserve versus Angiography for Multivessel Evaluation) study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2010; 56: 177-184.
2. Pijls NH, van Schaardenburgh P, Manoharan G, Boersma E, Bech JW, 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.
3. Mintz GS, Pichard AD, Kovach JA, Kent KM, Satler LF, Javier SP, Popma JJ, Leon MB,. Impact of preintervention intravascular ultrasound imaging on transcatheter treatment strategies in coronary artery disease. Am J Cardiol 1994; 73: 423-430.
4. Abizaid AS, Mintz GS, Abizaid A, Mehran R, Lansky AJ, Pichard AD, Satler LF, Wu H, Kent KM, Leon MB,. One-year follow-up after intravascular ultrasound assessment of moderate left main coronary artery disease in patients with ambiguous angiograms. J Am Coll Cardiol 1999; 34: 707-715.
5. Abizaid A, Mintz GS, Pichard AD, Kent KM, Satler LF, Walsh CL, Popma JJ, Leon MB,. Clinical, intravascular ultrasound, and quantitative angiographic determinants of the coronary flow reserve before and after percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. Am J Cardiol 1998; 82: 423-428.
6. Abizaid AS, Mintz GS, Mehran R, Abizaid A, Lansky AJ, et al. Long-term follow-up after percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty was not performed based on intravascular ultrasound findings: Importance of lumen dimensions. Circulation 1999; 100: 256-261.
7. McDaniel MC, Eshtehardi P, Sawaya FJ, Douglas JS Jr, Samady H,. Contemporary clinical applications of coronary intravascular ultrasound. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2011; 4: 1155-1167.
8. Takagi A, Tsurumi Y, Ishii Y, Suzuki K, Kawana M, Kasanuki H,. Clinical potential of intravascular ultrasound for physiological assessment of coronary stenosis: Relationship between quantitative ultrasound tomography and pressure-derived fractional flow reserve. Circulation 1999; 100: 250-255.
9. Tobis J, Azarbal B, Slavin L,. Assessment of intermediate severity coronary lesions in the catheterization laboratory. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007; 49: 839-848.
10. Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gotzsche PC, Ioannidis JP, Clarke M, Devereaux PJ, Kleijnen J, Moher D,. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: Explanation and elaboration. J Clin Epidemiol 2009; 62: e1-e34.
11. Macaskill P, Gatsonis C, Deeks J, Harbord R, Takwoingi Y,. In:, Deeks J, Bossuyt P, Gatsonis C, editors. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Diagnostic Test Accuracy. The Cochrane Collaboration; 2010.
12. Whiting P, Rutjes AW, Reitsma JB, Bossuyt PM, Kleijnen J,. The development of QUADAS: A tool for the quality assessment of studies of diagnostic accuracy included in systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol 2003; 3: 25.
13. Zamora J, Abraira V, Muriel A, Khan K, Coomarasamy A,. Meta-DiSc: A software for meta-analysis of test accuracy data. BMC Med Res Methodol 2006; 6: 31.
14. Newcombe RG,. Two-sided confidence intervals for the single proportion: Comparison of seven methods. Stat Med 1998; 17: 857-872.
15. Deville WL, Buntinx F, Bouter LM, Montori VM, de Vet HC, van der Windt DA, Bezemer PD,. Conducting systematic reviews of diagnostic studies: Didactic guidelines. BMC Med Res Methodol 2002; 2: 9.
16. Walter SD,. Properties of the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve for diagnostic test data. Stat Med 2002; 21: 1237-1256.
17. Moses LE, Shapiro D, Littenberg B,. Combining independent studies of a diagnostic test into a summary ROC curve: Data-analytic approaches and some additional considerations. Stat Med 1993; 12: 1293-1316.
18. Sousa MR, Ribeiro AL,. Systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic and prognostic studies: A tutorial. Arq Bras Cardiol 2009; 92: 229-238.
19. Dinnes J, Deeks J, Kirby J, Roderick P,. A methodological review of how heterogeneity has been examined in systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy. Health Technol Assess (Winchester, England) 2005; 9: 1-113.
20. Lijmer JG, Bossuyt PM, Heisterkamp SH,. Exploring sources of heterogeneity in systematic reviews of diagnostic tests. Stat Med 2002; 21: 1525-1537.
21. Ben-Dor I, Torguson R, Deksissa T, Xue Z, Satler LF, Pichard AD, Waksman R,. Intravascular ultrasound lumen area parameters for assessment of physiological ischemia by fractional flow reserve in intermediate coronary artery stenosis. Cardiovasc Revasc Med 2012; 13: 177-182.
22. Gonzalo N, Escaned J, Alfonso F, Nolte C, Rodriguez V, et al. Morphometric assessment of coronary stenosis relevance with optical coherence tomography: A comparison with fractional flow reserve and intravascular ultrasound. J Am Coll Cardiol 2012; 59: 1080-1089.
23. Ben-Dor I, Torguson R, Gaglia MA Jr, Gonzalez MA, Maluenda G, et al. Correlation between fractional flow reserve and intravascular ultrasound lumen area in intermediate coronary artery stenosis. EuroIntervention 2011; 7: 225-233.
24. Kang SJ, Ahn JM, Song H, Kim WJ, Lee JY, et al. Usefulness of minimal luminal coronary area determined by intravascular ultrasound to predict functional significance in stable and unstable angina pectoris. Am J Cardiol 2012; 109: 947-953.
25. Kang SJ, Lee JY, Ahn JM, Mintz GS, Kim WJ, et al. Validation of intravascular ultrasound-derived parameters with fractional flow reserve for assessment of coronary stenosis severity. Circ Cardiovasc Interv 2011; 4: 65-71.
26. Kang SJ, Lee JY, Ahn JM, Song HG, Kim WJ, et al. Intravascular ultrasound-derived predictors for fractional flow reserve in intermediate left main disease. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2011; 4: 1168-1174.
27. Briguori C, Anzuini A, Airoldi F, Gimelli G, Nishida T, Adamian M, Corvaja N, Di Mario C, Colombo A,. Intravascular ultrasound criteria for the assessment of the functional significance of intermediate coronary artery stenoses and comparison with fractional flow reserve. Am J Cardiol 2001; 87: 136-141.
28. Jasti V, Ivan E, Yalamanchili V, Wongpraparut N, Leesar MA,. Correlations between fractional flow reserve and intravascular ultrasound in patients with an ambiguous left main coronary artery stenosis. Circulation 2004; 110: 2831-2836.
29. Koo BK, Yang HM, Doh JH, Choe H, Lee SY, et al. Optimal intravascular ultrasound criteria and their accuracy for defining the functional significance of intermediate coronary stenoses of different locations. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2011; 4: 803-811.
30. Lee CH, Tai BC, Soon CY, Low AF, Poh KK, et al. New set of intravascular ultrasound-derived anatomic criteria for defining functionally significant stenoses in small coronary arteries (results from Intravascular Ultrasound Diagnostic Evaluation of Atherosclerosis in Singapore [IDEAS] study). Am J Cardiol 2010; 105: 1378-1384.
31. Honest H, Khan KS,. Reporting of measures of accuracy in systematic reviews of diagnostic literature. BMC Health Serv Res 2002; 2: 4.
32. De Bruyne B, Sarma J,. Fractional flow reserve: A review: Invasive imaging. Heart 2008; 94: 949-959.
33. Sharif F, Trana C, Muller O, De Bruyne B,. Practical tips and tricks for the measurement of fractional flow reserve. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2010; 76: 978-985.
34. Yoon MH, Tahk SJ, Yang HM, Park JS, Zheng M, et al. Comparison of the intracoronary continuous infusion method using a microcatheter and the intravenous continuous adenosine infusion method for inducing maximal hyperemia for fractional flow reserve measurement. Am Heart J 2009; 157: 1050-1056.
35. Egger M,. Evaluation of diagnostic and screening tests. In:, Egger M, editor. Systematic Reviews in Health Care, Vol. 1. London: BMJ Publishing Group; 2001. pp. 269-283.
36. Bech GJ, De Bruyne B, Bonnier HJ, Bartunek J, Wijns W, Peels K, Heyndrickx GR, Koolen JJ, Pijls NH,. Long-term follow-up after deferral of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty of intermediate stenosis on the basis of coronary pressure measurement. J Am Coll Cardiol 1998; 31: 841-847.
37. Bech GJ, De Bruyne B, Pijls NH, de Muinck ED, et al. Fractional flow reserve to determine the appropriateness of angioplasty in moderate coronary stenosis: A randomized trial. Circulation 2001; 103: 2928-2934.
38. Tonino PA, De Bruyne B, Pijls NH, Siebert U, Ikeno F, et al. Fractional flow reserve versus angiography for guiding percutaneous coronary intervention. N Engl J Med 2009; 360: 213-224.
39. Kern MJ, Samady H,. Current concepts of integrated coronary physiology in the catheterization laboratory. J Am Coll Cardiol 2010; 55: 173-185.