Quantitative Coronary Physiology for Clinical Management: the Imaging Standard

Current Cardiology Reports

Volumn 18, Issue 1, 2016, Pages 1-10

  Gould, K Lance ^a   Johnson, Nils P ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

Author keywords

Clinical coronary physiology; Physiologic severity of CAD; Quantitative imaging standard; Quantitative myocardial perfusion

Indexed keywords

AMMONIA N 13; CAFFEINE; OXYGEN 15; RUBIDIUM 82;

BLOOD PRESSURE; CARDIAC IMAGING; CARDIOVASCULAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE; CLINICAL PRACTICE; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; CORONARY ARTERY OBSTRUCTION; CORONARY FLOW RESERVE; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DISEASE SEVERITY; ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY; FRACTIONAL FLOW RESERVE; HEART INFARCTION; HEART MUSCLE PERFUSION; HUMAN; IMAGING AND DISPLAY; MYOCARDIAL PERFUSION IMAGING; NONHUMAN; PERCUTANEOUS CORONARY INTERVENTION; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; REST; REVIEW; RISK BENEFIT ANALYSIS; SINGLE PHOTON EMISSION COMPUTER TOMOGRAPHY; THREE DIMENSIONAL IMAGING; TWO DIMENSIONAL IMAGING; CORONARY ARTERY BLOOD FLOW; PATIENT SELECTION; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PROCEDURES; RISK FACTOR; SCINTISCANNING;

CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; CORONARY CIRCULATION; HUMANS; MYOCARDIAL PERFUSION IMAGING; PATIENT SELECTION; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; RISK FACTORS;

EID: 84953330277     PISSN: 15233782     EISSN: 15343170     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11886-015-0684-7     Document Type: Review

References (55)

1. Johnson NP, Tóth GG, Lai D, Zhu H, Açar G, Agostoni P, et al. Prognostic value of fractional flow reserve: linking physiologic severity to clinical outcomes. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;64:1641–54. From a large database establishes statistically the severity-risk-benefit continuum of CAD having profound implications for the imaging standard of quantifying severity and personalized management.
2. Taqueti VR, Hachamovitch R, Murthy VL, Naya M, Foster CR, Hainer J, et al. Global coronary flow reserve associates with adverse cardiovascular events independently of luminal angiographic severity, and modifies. The effect of early revascularization. Circulation. 2015;131:19–27. Documents CFR thresholds for high, intermediate and low risk global diffuse CAD.
3. Gould KL, Johnson NP, Kaul S, Kirkeeide RL, Mintz GS, Rentrop KP, et al. Patient selection for elective revascularization to reduce myocardial infarction and mortality: new lessons from randomized trials, coronary physiology, and statistics. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2015;8, e003099. doi:10.1161/CIRCIMAGING.114.003099. Establishes basic concepts and clinical implications of the severity-risk-benefit continuum to explain failure of randomized intervention trials to reduce risk of MI or mortality and criteria for patient selection clinically and for future trials to demonstrate improved event free survival.
4. Johnson NP, Gould KL. Physiologic basis for angina and ST change: PET-verified thresholds of quantitative stress myocardial perfusion and coronary flow reserve. J Am Coll Cardiol Img. 2011;4:990–8.
5. Johnson NP, Gould KL. Integrating noninvasive absolute flow, coronary flow reserve, and ischemic thresholds into a comprehensive map of physiologic severity. J Am Coll Cardiol Img. 2012;5:430–40. Reports the concept of Coronary Flow Capacity to define physiologic severity of CAD that incorporates stress flow in cc/min/gm and CFR thereby accounting for the great heterogeneity of continuous values into a simple color coded evidences based schema for interventional and management decisions.
6. Gould KL, Johnson NP, Bateman TM, Beanlands RS, Bengel FM, Bober R, et al. Anatomic versus physiologic assessment of coronary artery disease: role of CFR, FFR, and PET imaging in revascularization decision-making. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;62:1639–53. Overview of physiologic severity of focal and global diffuse CAD with review of the world’s literature on quantitative myocardial perfusion.
7. Goff SL, Mazor KM, Ting HHT, Kleppel R, Rothberg MB. How cardiologists present the benefits of percutaneous coronary interventions to patients with stable angina—a qualitative analysis. JAMA Intern Med. 2014;174:1614–21.
8. Rothberg MB, Scherer L, Kashef MA, Coylewright M, Ting HHT, Hu B, et al. The effect of information presentation on beliefs about the benefits of elective percutaneous coronary intervention. JAMA Intern Med. 2014;174:1623–9. Documents common invalid informed consent for PCI “to prevent heart attack or death” based on absence of improved event free survival after PCI in randomized trials.
9. Hachamovitch R, Nutter B, Hlatky MA, et al. Patient management after noninvasive cardiac imaging results from SPARC (study of myocardial perfusion and coronary anatomy imaging rolesin coronary artery disease). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;59:462–74.
10. Hermann LK, Newman DH, Pleasant WA, et al. Yield of routine provocative cardiac testing among patients in an emergency department-based chest pain unit. JAMA Intern Med. 2013;173:1128–33.
11. Young LH, Wackers FJ, Chyun DA, et al. Cardiac outcomes after screening for asymptomatic coronary artery disease in patients with type 2 diabetes: the DIAD study: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2009;301:1547–55.
12. Patel MR, Dai D, Hernandez AF, et al. Prevalence and predictors of nonobstructive coronary artery disease identified with coronary angiography in contemporary clinical practice. Am Heart J. 2014;167:846–52.e2.
13. Pijls NH, van Son JA, Kirkeeide RL, De Bruyne B, Gould KL. 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;87:1354–67.
14. 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;49:2105–11.
15. Pijls NH, Fearon WF, Tonino PA, 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;56:177–84.
16. De Bruyne B, Fearon WF, Pijls NH, Barbato E, Tonino P, Piroth Z, et al. Fractional flow reserve-guided PCI for stable coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med. 2014;371:1208–17. FAME 2 results showing no reduced MI or death after PCI compared to medical treatment for visually significant angiogram stenosis with FFR of 0.8 or less.
17. Curzen N, Rana O, Nicholas Z, Golledge P, Zaman A, Oldroyd K, et al. Does routine pressure wire assessment influence management strategy at coronary angiography for diagnosis of chest pain? The RIPCORD study. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2014;7:248–55.
18. Van Belle E, Rioufol G, Pouillot C, Cuisset T, Bougrini K, Teiger E, et al. Outcome impact of coronary revascularization strategy reclassification with fractional flow reserve at time of diagnostic angiography: insights from a large French multicenter fractional flow reserve registry. Circulation. 2014;129:173–85. Documents frequent discordant between low FFR and absence of significant angiogram stenosis.
19. Toth G, Hamilos M, Pyxaras S, Mangiacapra F, Nelis O, De Vroey F, et al. Evolving concepts of angiogram: fractional flow reserve discordances in 4000 coronary stenosis. Eur Heart J. 2014;35:2831–8. Documents frequent discordant between low FFR and absence of significant angiogram stenosis.
20. Levine GN, Bates ER, Blankenship JC, Bailey SR, Bittl JA, Cercek B, et al. 2011 ACCF/AHA/SCAI Guideline for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines and the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions. Circulation. 2011;124:e574–651. Also 2011 ACCF/AHA/SCAI Guideline for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;58(24):e44-e122. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2011.08.007.
21. Wijeysundera HC, Nallamothu BK, Krumholz HM, Tu JV, Ko DT. Meta-analysis: effects of percutaneous coronary intervention versus medical therapy on angina relief. Ann Intern Med. 2010;152:370–9.
22. Boden WE, O’Rourke RA, Teo KK, Hartigan PM, Maron DJ, Kostuk WJ, et al. Optimal medical therapy with or without PCI for stable coronary disease. N Engl J Med. 2007;356:1503–16.
23. Inducible Myocardial Ischemia and Outcomes in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease and Left Ventricular Dysfunction—Substudy of STICH With Reversible Ischemia by SPECT. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;61:1860–1870.
24. Johnson NP, Kirkeeide RL, Gould KL. Is discordance of coronary flow reserve (CFR) and fractional flow reserve (FFR) due to methodology or clinically relevant coronary pathophysiology? J Am Coll Cardiol Img. 2012;5:193–202.
25. Murthy VL, Naya M, Foster CR, Hainer J, Gaber M, Di Carli G, et al. Improved cardiac risk assessment with noninvasive measures of coronary flow reserve. Circulation. 2011;124:2215–24.
26. De Bruyne B, Baudhuin T, Melin JA, Pijls NH, Sys SU, Bol A, et al. Coronary flow reserve calculated from pressure measurements in humans. Validation with positron emission tomography. Circulation. 1994;89:1013–22.
27. Johnson NP, Johnson DT, Kirkeeide RL, Berry C, De Bruyne B, Fearon WF, et al. Repeatability of fractional flow reserve (FFR) despite variations I systemic and coronary hemodynamics. J m Coll Cardiol: Cardiovascular Interventions. 2015 (In Press).
28. Tauchert M. Coronary reserve capacity and maximum oxygen consumption of the human heart. Basic Res Cardiol. 1973;68(2):183–223.
29. Marcus M, Wright C, Doty D, Eastham C, Laughlin D, Krumm P, et al. Measurements of coronary velocity and reactive hyperemia in the coronary circulation of humans. Circ Res. 1981;49(4):877–91.
30. White CW, Wright CB, Doty DB, Hiratza LF, Eastham CL, Harrison DG, et al. Does visual interpretation of the coronary arteriogram predict the physiologic importance of a coronary stenosis? N Engl J Med. 1984;310(13):819–24.
31. Wilson RF, Laughlin DE, Ackell PH, Chilian WM, Holida MD, Hartley CJ, et al. Transluminal, subselective measurement of coronary artery blood flow velocity and vasodilator reserve in man. Circulation. 1985;72(1):82–92.
32. Marcus ML, Wilson RF, White CW. Methods of measurement of myocardial blood flow in patients: a critical review. Circulation. 1987;76(2):245–53.
33. Wilson RF, Wyche K, Christensen BV, Zimmer S, Laxson DD. Effects of adenosine on human coronary arterial circulation. Circulation. 1990;82(5):1595–606.
34. Wang L, Jerosch-Herold M, Jacobs DR, Shahar E, Detrano R, Folsom AR. Coronary calcification and myocardial perfusion in asymptomatic adults. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;48:1018–26.
35. Wang L, Jerosch-Herold M, Jacobs DR, Shahar E, Detrano R, Folsom AR. Coronary risk factors and myocardial perfusion in asymptomatic adults: the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;47:565–72.
36. Sdringola S, Johnson NP, Kirkeeide RL, Cid E, Gould KL. Impact of unexpected factors on quantitative myocardial perfusion and coronary flow reserve in young, asymptomatic volunteers. J Am Coll Cardiol Img. 2011;4:402–12.
37. Murdock RH, Cobb FR. Effects of infarcted myocardium on regional blood flow measurements to ischemic regions in canine heart. Circ Res. 1980;47:701–9.
38. Rivas F, Cobb FR, Bache RJ, Greenfield JC. Relationship of blood flow toischemic regions and extent of myocardial infarction—serial measurement of blood flow to ischemic regions in dogs. Circ Res. 1976;38:439–47.
39. Zhang WZ, Zha DG, Cheng GX, Yang SQ, Huang XB, Qin JX, et al. Assessment of regional myocardial blood flow with myocardial contrast echocardiography: an experimental study. Echocardiography. 2004;21:409–16.
40. 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.
41. Johnson NP, Gould KL. Regadenoson versus dipyridamole hyperemia for cardiac PET imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol Img. 2015;8:438–47.
42. Johnson NP, Gould KL. Clinical evaluation of a new concept: resting myocardial perfusion heterogeneity quantified by Markovian analysis of P.E.T. identifies coronary microvascular dysfunction and early atherosclerosis in 1,034 subjects. J Nucl Med. 2005;46:1427–37.
43. Loghin C, Sdringola S, Gould KL. Does coronary vasodilation after adenosine override endothelin-1 induced coronary vasoconstriction? Experimental validation of a new concept in myocardial perfusion imaging: resting perfusion defects that improve after adenosine are markers of coronary endothelial dysfunction. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol. 2007;292:496–502.
44. Johnson NP, Gould KL. Physiology of endothelin in producing myocardial perfusion heterogeneity: a mechanistic study using darusentan and positron emission tomography. J Nucl Cardiol. 2013;20:835–44.
45. Gould KL, Kirkeeide R, Johnson NP. Coronary branch steal—experimental validation and clinical implications of interacting stenosis in branching coronary arteries. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2010;3:701–9.
46. Loghin C, Sdringola S, Gould KL. Common artifacts in PET myocardial perfusion images due to attenuation-emission misregistration: clinical significance, causes and solutions in 1177 patients. J Nucl Med. 2004;45:1029–39.
47. Gould KL, Pan T, Loghin C, Johnson N, Guha A, Sdringola S. Frequent diagnostic errors in cardiac PET-CT due to misregistration of CT attenuation and emission PET images: a definitive analysis of causes, consequences and corrections. J Nucl Med. 2007;48:1112–21.
48. Johnson NP, Pan T, Gould KL. Shifted helical CT to optimize cardiac PET-CT co-registration: quantitative improvement and limitations. J Mol Imaging. 2010;9:256–67.
49. Klein R, Beanlands RSB, deKemp RA. Quantification of myocardial blood flow and flow reserve: technical aspects. J Nucl Cardiol. 2010;17:555–70.
50. deKemp RA, Yoshinaga KY, Beanlands RSB. Will 30dimensional PET-CT enable the routine quantification of myocardial blood flow. J Nucl Cardiol. 2007;14:380–97.
51. Gould KL, Pan T, Loghin C, Johnson NP, Sdringola. Reducing radiation dose in rest stress cardiac PET-CT by single post stress cine CT for attenuation correction—quantitative validation. J Nucl Med. 2008;49:738–45.
52. Kaster TS, Dwivedi G, Susser L, Renaud JM, Beanlands RS, Chow BJ, et al. Single low-dose CT scan optimized for rest-stress PET attenuation correction and quantification of coronary artery calcium. J Nucl Cardiol. 2015;22:419–28.
53. Vasquez AF, Johnson NP, Gould KL. Variation in quantitative myocardial perfusion due to arterial input selection. J Am Coll Cardiol Img. 2013;6:559–68.
54. Yoshida K, Mullani N, Gould KL. Coronary flow and flow reserve by positron emission tomography simplified for clinical application using Rb-82 or N-13 ammonia. J Nucl Med. 1996;37:1701–12.
55. Renaud JM, DaSilva JN, Beanlands RSB, deKemp RA. Characterizing the normal range of myocardial blood flow with rubidium-82 and N-13 ammonia PET imaging. J Nucl Cardiol. 2013;20:578–91.