SwePub
Sök i SwePub databas

  Utökad sökning

Träfflista för sökning "WFRF:(Kristensen Steen Dalby) ;lar1:(oru)"

Sökning: WFRF:(Kristensen Steen Dalby) > Örebro universitet

  • Resultat 1-5 av 5
Sortera/gruppera träfflistan
   
NumreringReferensOmslagsbildHitta
1.
  • Sejr-Hansen, Martin, et al. (författare)
  • Comparison of Quantitative Flow Ratio and Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio for Immediate Assessment of Non-Culprit Lesions in Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction An iSTEMI Substudy
  • 2018
  • Ingår i: Journal of the American College of Cardiology. - : Elsevier. - 0735-1097 .- 1558-3597. ; 72:13, s. B248-B249
  • Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
    • BACKGROUND: Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) is an angiography-based approach for in-procedure functional evaluation of coronary artery lesions. We evaluated the diagnostic performance of QFR with instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) in non-culprit lesions (NCLs) in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and with staged fractional flow reserve (FFR) as reference standard.METHODS: This is a post-hoc analysis of the iSTEMI study. All NCLs were assessed with iFR in the acute setting and with iFR and FFR at staged (median 19 days) follow-up. QFR (Medis Medical Imaging bv., The Netherlands) was computed for all analyzable NCLs in a core lab by an investigator blinded to iFR and FFR results. Diagnostic cut-off values were 0.80 for QFR, 0.89 for iFR, and 0.80 for FFR.RESULTS: A total of 156 NCLs in 120 patients were included in the iSTEMI study. Paired iFR and FFR data were available for 146 NCls in 112 patients. Of these, QFR analysis was feasible in 103 (71 %) lesions assessed in the acute setting. Mean acute QFR was 0.800.13, acute iFR was 0.860.12, and staged FFR was 0.800.11. With staged FFR as reference standard, diagnostic accuracy was 84% (95%CI: 76-90) for acute QFR and 73% (95%CI: 66-83) for acute iFR (p¼0.09), area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) was 0.89 (95%CI: 0.82-0.95) vs. 0.77 (95%CI: 0.68-0.87) (p¼0.02), sensitivity was 83% (95%CI: 69-92) vs. 85% (95%CI: 73-92) (p¼0.79), specificity was 84% (95%CI: 72-92) vs. 64% (95%CI: 53-75) (p¼0.11), positive predictive value was 81% (95%CI: 57-82) vs. 70% (95%CI: 57-82)(p¼0.06), and negative predictive value was 86% (95%CI: 76-95) vs. 84% (95%CI: 69-91)(p¼0.37), for acute QFR and acute iFR, respectively.CONCLUSION: The diagnostic performance of acute QFR in post hocevaluation of NCLs in STEMI patients was at least similar to acuteassessment by iFR with staged procedure FFR as reference. QFR couldprovide an easy, safe and cost-effective solution to evaluate NCLs inthe acute phase, thus potentially reducing the number of unnecessaryfollow-up procedures.CATEGORIES IMAGING: Physiologic Lesion Assessment.
  •  
2.
  • Thim, Troels, et al. (författare)
  • Agreement between iFR and FFR in staged follow-up evaluation of non-culprit stenoses after ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (iSTEMI substudy)
  • 2017
  • Ingår i: Journal of the American College of Cardiology. - : Elsevier. - 0735-1097 .- 1558-3597. ; 70:18, s. B91-B91
  • Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
    • BACKGROUND: Classification agreement between instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) and fractional flow reserve (FFR) is approximately 80% in stable patients. It was recently shown that FFR guidance, as compared to iFR guidance, was associated with a higher risk of subsequent revascularization among patients with non- ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. The classification agreement, and the impact of time interval, between iFR and FFR in the assessment of non-culprit lesions after recent ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) has not been described.METHODS: The iSTEMI study assessed agreement between iFR across non-culprit stenoses at the index procedure in patients with STEMI versus iFR and FFR at a follow-up angiography. The interval between STEMI and follow-up evaluation was at the discretion of the treating physicians. In this substudy, classification agreement between follow-up iFR and follow-up FFR was evaluated within groups defined according to follow-up time point after STEMI, i.e., <5days, 5-15days, and16 days. iFR<0.90 and FFR0.80 were considered hemodynamically significant.RESULTS: Among 120 patients with 157 non-culprit stenoses, follow-up iFR and FFR was available in 112 patients with 146 non-culprit stenoses. Median follow-up interval was 16 days (IQR 5-32 days). The overall classification agreement was 84%. With follow-up<5days after STEMI, there was classification agreement between iFR and FFR was in 27 of 35 (77%) non-culprit stenoses. With follow-up 5-15 after STEMI, there was classification agreement in 33 of 38 (86%) non-culprit stenoses. With follow-up 16 days after STEMI, there was classification agreement in 63 of 73 (86%) non-culprit stenoses. The observed differences in these proportions over time after STEMI were not statistically significant (<5versus5days, p¼0.19).CONCLUSION: Overall, classification agreement between iFR and FFR in the assessment of non-culprit lesions after STEMI was comparable to that observed in stable patients. Time interval between STEMI and follow-up evaluation may impact agreement between follow-up iFR and follow-up FFR, although the observed differences were not statistically significant.
  •  
3.
  • Thim, Troels, et al. (författare)
  • Agreement between nonculprit stenosis follow-up iFR and FFR after STEMI (iSTEMI substudy)
  • 2020
  • Ingår i: BMC Research Notes. - : BioMed Central. - 1756-0500. ; 13:1
  • Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
    • OBJECTIVE: To evaluate agreement between instantaneous wave free ratio (iFR) and fractional flow reserve (FFR) for the functional assessment of nonculprit coronary stenoses at staged follow-up after ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).RESULTS: We measured iFR and FFR at staged follow-up in 112 STEMI patients with 146 nonculprit stenoses. Median interval between STEMI and follow-up was 16 (interquartile range 5-32) days. Agreement between iFR and FFR was 77% < 5 days after STEMI and 86% after ≥ 5 days (p = 0.19). Among cases with disagreement, the proportion of cases with hemodynamically significant iFR and non-significant FFR were different when assessed < 5 days (5 in 8, 63%) versus ≥ 5 days (3 in 15, 20%) after STEMI (p = 0.04). Overall classification agreement between iFR and FFR was comparable to that observed in stable patients. Time interval between STEMI and follow-up evaluation may impact agreement between iFR and FFR.
  •  
4.
  • Thim, Troels, et al. (författare)
  • Instantaneous wave-free ratio cutoff values for nonculprit stenosis classification in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (an iSTEMI substudy)
  • 2020
  • Ingår i: Coronary Artery Disease. - : Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. - 0954-6928 .- 1473-5830. ; 31:5, s. 411-416
  • Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
    • Objectives: The instantaneous wave-free ratio cutoff value of <0.90 for hemodynamic significance of coronary stenoses has been validated in stable patients. We examined different cutoff values in the evaluation of nonculprit stenoses in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.Methods: We measured instantaneous wave-free ratio across nonculprit stenoses in the acute setting and at follow-up in 120 patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and 157 nonculprit stenoses, of which, 113 patients with 147 nonculprit stenoses completed follow-up.Results: The prevalence of nonculprit stenosis hemodynamic significance was 52% in the acute setting and 41% at follow-up. With follow-up, instantaneous wave-free ratio as reference, acute instantaneous wave-free ratio >0.90 had a negative predictive value of 89%. Acute instantaneous wave-free ratio <0.90 had a positive predictive value of 68%. Acute instantaneous wave-free ratio >0.93 had a negative predictive value of 100%. Acute instantaneous wave-free ratio <0.86 and <0.83 had positive predictive values of 71 and 77%. Using acute instantaneous wave-free ratio <0.90 as cutoff for hemodynamic significance yielded the highest degree of classification agreement between acute and follow-up instantaneous wave-free ratio.Conclusions: In patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, acute instantaneous wave-free ratio with the cutoff values <0.90 for hemodynamic significance appears optimal in the evaluation of nonculprit stenoses and has a high negative predictive value and a moderate positive predictive value.
  •  
5.
  • Thim, Troels, et al. (författare)
  • Nonculprit Stenosis Evaluation Using Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio in Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction
  • 2017
  • Ingår i: JACC. - New York, USA : Elsevier. - 1936-8798 .- 1876-7605. ; 10:24, s. 2528-2535
  • Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
    • OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to examine the level of agreement between acute instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) measured across nonculprit stenoses in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and iFR measured at a staged follow-up procedure.BACKGROUND: Acute full revascularization of nonculprit stenoses in STEMI is debated and currently guided by angiography. Acute functional assessment of nonculprit stenoses may be considered.METHODS: Immediately after successful primary culprit intervention for STEMI, nonculprit coronary stenoses were evaluated with iFR and left untreated. Follow-up evaluation with iFR was performed at a later stage. iFR <0.90 was considered hemodynamically significant.RESULTS: One hundred twenty patients with 157 nonculprit lesions were included. Median acute iFR was 0.89 (interquartile range: 0.82 to 0.94; n = 156), and median follow-up iFR was 0.91 (interquartile range [IQR]: 0.86 to 0.96; n = 147). Classification agreement was 78% between acute and follow-up iFR. The negative predictive value of acute iFR was 89%. Median time from acute to follow-up evaluation was 16 days (IQR: 5 to 32 days). With follow-up within 5 days after STEMI, no difference was observed between acute and follow-up iFR, and classification agreement was 89%. With follow-up ≥16 days after STEMI, acute iFR was lower than follow-up iFR, and classification agreement was 70%.CONCLUSIONS: Acute iFR evaluation appeared valid for ruling out significant nonculprit stenoses in patients with STEMI undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention. The time interval from acute to follow-up iFR influenced classification agreement, suggesting that inherent physiological disarrangements during STEMI may contribute to classification disagreement.
  •  
Skapa referenser, mejla, bekava och länka
  • Resultat 1-5 av 5

Kungliga biblioteket hanterar dina personuppgifter i enlighet med EU:s dataskyddsförordning (2018), GDPR. Läs mer om hur det funkar här.
Så här hanterar KB dina uppgifter vid användning av denna tjänst.

 
pil uppåt Stäng

Kopiera och spara länken för att återkomma till aktuell vy