Background: Intravenous infusion of adenosine is considered standard practice for fractional flow reserve (FFR) assessment but is associated with adverse side-effects and is time-consuming. Intracoronary bolus injection of adenosine is better tolerated by patients, cheaper, and less time-consuming. However, current literature remains fragmented and modestly sized regarding the equivalence of intracoronary versus intravenous adenosine. We aim to investigate the relationship between intracoronary adenosine and intravenous adenosine to determine FFR.
Methods: We performed a lesion-level meta-analysis to compare intracoronary adenosine with intravenous adenosine (140 µg/kg per minute) for FFR assessment. The search was conducted in accordance to the Preferred Reporting for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis statement. Lesion-level data were obtained by contacting the respective authors or by digitization of scatterplots using custom-made software. Intracoronary adenosine dose was defined as; low: <40 µg, intermediate: 40 to 99 µg, and high: ≥100 µg.
Results: We collected 1972 FFR measurements (1413 lesions) comparing intracoronary with intravenous adenosine from 16 studies. There was a strong correlation (correlation coefficient =0.915; <0.001) between intracoronary-FFR and intravenous-FFR. Mean FFR was 0.81±0.11 for intracoronary adenosine and 0.81±0.11 for intravenous adenosine (<0.001). We documented a nonclinically relevant mean difference of 0.006 (limits of agreement: -0.066 to 0.078) between the methods. When stratified by the intracoronary adenosine dose, mean differences between intracoronary and intravenous-FFR amounted to 0.004, 0.011, or 0.000 FFR units for low-dose, intermediate-dose, and high-dose intracoronary adenosine, respectively.
Conclusions: The present study documents clinically irrelevant differences in FFR values obtained with intracoronary versus intravenous adenosine. Intracoronary adenosine hence confers a practical and patient-friendly alternative for intravenous adenosine for FFR assessment.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.119.007893 | DOI Listing |
Viruses
December 2024
Gilead Sciences, Inc., Foster City, CA 94404, USA.
Ebola virus (EBOV) causes severe disease in humans, with mortality as high as 90%. The small-molecule antiviral drug remdesivir (RDV) has demonstrated a survival benefit in EBOV-exposed rhesus macaques. Here, we characterize the efficacy of multiple intravenous RDV dosing regimens on survival of rhesus macaques 42 days after intramuscular EBOV exposure.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFMedicina (Kaunas)
December 2024
Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, 20132 Milan, Italy.
Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is a proven therapy for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) cardiogenic shock (CS). Dual anti-platelet therapy (i.e.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFJ Cardiovasc Electrophysiol
January 2025
Douala Gyneco-obstetric and Pediatric Hospital/University of Douala, Douala, Cameroon.
J Nippon Med Sch
January 2025
Department of Pediatrics, Nippon Medical School.
An infant was diagnosed as having X-linked agammaglobulinemia (XLA) at age 3 months and was receiving immunoglobulin replacement therapy. He developed SARS-CoV-2 infection at age 7 months and was treated with intravenous immunoglobulin, remdesivir, and dexamethasone. His respiratory symptoms improved quickly, and the infection resolved.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEnter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!