A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Validation of hemodynamic stress calculation in coronary computed tomography angiography versus intravascular ultrasound. | LitMetric

Background: Development in computational fluid dynamics and 3D construction could facilitate the calculation of hemodynamic stresses in coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA). However, the agreement between CCTA derived stresses and intravascular ultrasound/intravascular coronary angiography (IVUS/ICA)-derived stresses remains undetermined. Thus, the purpose of this study is to investigate if CCTA can serve as alternative to IVUS/ICA for hemodynamic evaluation.

Methods: In this retrospective study, 13 patients (14 arteries) with unstable angina who underwent both CCTA and IVUS/ICA at an interval of less than 7 days were consecutively included at the Chinese PLA General Hospital within the year of 2021. Slice-level minimal lumen area (MLA), percent area stenosis, velocity, pressure, Reynolds number, wall shear stress (WSS) and axial plaque stress (APS) were determined by both modalities. The agreement between CCTA and IVUS/ICA was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), Pearson's correlation coefficient and Bland-Altman analysis.

Results: CCTA overestimated the degree of area stenosis (50.22%±16.15% . 36.41%±19.37%, P=0.004) with the MLA showing no significant difference (5.81±2.24 . 6.72±2.04 mm, P=0.126). No statistical difference was observed in WSS (6.57±6.26 . 5.98±5.55 Pa, P=0.420) and APS (16.03±1,159.45 . -1.27±890.39 Pa, P=0.691) between CCTA and IVUS. Good correlation was found in velocity (ICC: 0.796, 95% CI: 0.752-0.833), Reynolds number (ICC: 0.810, 95% CI: 0.768-0.844) and WSS (ICC: 0.769, 95% CI: 0.718-0.810), while the ICC of APS was (ICC: 0.341, 95% CI: 0.197-0.458), indicating a relatively poor correlation.

Conclusions: CCTA can serve as a satisfactory alternative to the reference standard, IVUS/ICA in morphology simulation and hemodynamic stress calculation, especially in the calculation of WSS.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10102788PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/qims-22-832DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

hemodynamic stress
8
stress calculation
8
coronary computed
8
computed tomography
8
tomography angiography
8
ccta
8
agreement ccta
8
ccta serve
8
ccta ivus/ica
8
area stenosis
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!