Integrated Myocardial Perfusion Imaging Diagnostics Improve Detection of Functionally Significant Coronary Artery Stenosis by 13N-ammonia Positron Emission Tomography

Background—Recent evidence suggests that the diagnostic accuracy of myocardial perfusion imaging is improved by quantifying stress myocardial blood flow (MBF) in absolute terms. We evaluated a comprehensive quantitative 13N-ammonia positron emission tomography (13NH3-PET) diagnostic panel, including stress MBF, coronary flow reserve (CFR), and relative flow reserve (RFR) in conjunction with relative perfusion defect (PD) assessments to better detect functionally significant coronary artery stenosis. Methods and Results—A total of 130 patients (307 vessels) with coronary artery disease underwent both 13NH3-PET and invasive coronary angiography with fractional flow reserve (FFR) measurement. Diagnostic accuracy, optimal cut points, and discrimination indices of respective 13NH3-PET quantitative measures were compared, with FFR as standard reference. The capacity to discern disease with stepwise addition of stress MBF, CFR, and RFR to qualitatively assessed relative PD was also gauged, using the category-free net reclassification index. All quantitative measures showed significant correlation with FFR (PET-derived CFR, r=0.388; stress MBF, r=0.496; and RFR, r=0.780; all P<0.001). Optimal respective cut points for FFR ⩽0.8 and ⩽0.75 were 1.99 and 1.84 mL/min per g for stress MBF and 2.12 and 2.00 for PET-derived CFR. Discrimination indices of quantitative measures that correlated with FFR ⩽0.8 were all significantly higher than that of relative PD (area under the curve: 0.626, 0.730, 0.806, and 0.897 for relative PD, CFR, stress MBF, and RFR, respectively; overall comparison P<0.001). The capacity for functionally significant coronary stenosis was incrementally improved by the successive addition of CFR (net reclassification index=0.629), stress MBF (net reclassification index=0.950), and RFR (net reclassification index=1.253; all P<0.001) to relative PD. Conclusions—Integrating quantitative 13NH3-PET measures with qualitative myocardial perfusion assessment provides superior diagnostic accuracy and improves the capacity to detect functionally significant coronary artery stenosis. Clinical Trial Registration—URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifiers: NCT01621438 and NCT01366404.

[1]  Lubomir M. Hadjiiski,et al.  Coronary artery analysis: Computer-assisted selection of best-quality segments in multiple-phase coronary CT angiography. , 2016, Medical physics.

[2]  Ryotaro Yamada,et al.  Invasive Evaluation of Patients With Angina in the Absence of Obstructive Coronary Artery Disease , 2015, Circulation.

[3]  A. Lammertsma,et al.  Relative Flow Reserve Derived From Quantitative Perfusion Imaging May Not Outperform Stress Myocardial Blood Flow for Identification of Hemodynamically Significant Coronary Artery Disease , 2015, Circulation. Cardiovascular imaging.

[4]  E. Nagel,et al.  Diagnostic Accuracy of Stress Myocardial Perfusion Imaging Compared to Invasive Coronary Angiography With Fractional Flow Reserve Meta-Analysis , 2015, Circulation. Cardiovascular imaging.

[5]  N. Tamaki,et al.  Coronary flow reserve estimated by positron emission tomography to diagnose significant coronary artery disease and predict cardiac events. , 2014, Circulation journal : official journal of the Japanese Circulation Society.

[6]  William Wijns,et al.  Evolving concepts of angiogram: fractional flow reserve discordances in 4000 coronary stenoses. , 2014, European heart journal.

[7]  A. Lammertsma,et al.  Quantitative assessment of myocardial perfusion in the detection of significant coronary artery disease: cutoff values and diagnostic accuracy of quantitative [(15)O]H2O PET imaging. , 2014, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[8]  S. Tansuphaswadikul,et al.  Visual-functional mismatch and results of fractional flow reserve guided percutaneous coronary revascularization. , 2014, Journal of the Medical Association of Thailand = Chotmaihet thangphaet.

[9]  Helmut Baumgartner,et al.  2014 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization: the Task Force on Myocardial Revascularization of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS). Developed with the special contribution of the European Association of Percutaneous , 2014, European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery.

[10]  Nikola Jagic,et al.  Fractional flow reserve-guided PCI for stable coronary artery disease. , 2014, The New England journal of medicine.

[11]  M. Kern.  Seeing and not believing: Understanding the visual‐functional mismatch between angiography and FFR , 2014, Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions.

[12]  B. Dimitrov,et al.  Does Routine Pressure Wire Assessment Influence Management Strategy at Coronary Angiography for Diagnosis of Chest Pain?: The RIPCORD Study , 2014, Circulation. Cardiovascular interventions.

[13]  T. Akasaka,et al.  Prevalence of visual–functional mismatch regarding coronary artery stenosis in the CVIT-DEFER registry , 2014, Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics.

[14]  Juhani Knuuti,et al.  Anatomic versus physiologic assessment of coronary artery disease. Role of coronary flow reserve, fractional flow reserve, and positron emission tomography imaging in revascularization decision-making. , 2013, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[15]  K. Gould,et al.  Coronary Anatomy to Predict Physiology: Fundamental Limits , 2013, Circulation. Cardiovascular imaging.

[16]  N. Tamaki,et al.  Myocardial blood flow quantification using positron-emission tomography: analysis and practice in the clinical setting. , 2013, Circulation journal : official journal of the Japanese Circulation Society.

[17]  Seung‐Jung Park,et al.  Sex differences in the visual-functional mismatch between coronary angiography or intravascular ultrasound versus fractional flow reserve. , 2013, JACC. Cardiovascular interventions.

[18]  R. Torguson,et al.  FIRST: Fractional Flow Reserve and Intravascular Ultrasound Relationship Study. , 2013, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[19]  M. Lubberink,et al.  Hybrid Imaging Using Quantitative H215O PET and CT-Based Coronary Angiography for the Detection of Coronary Artery Disease , 2013, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[20]  Eun Bo Shim,et al.  Visual-functional mismatch between coronary angiography and fractional flow reserve. , 2012, JACC. Cardiovascular interventions.

[21]  G. Beller.  Quantification of myocardial blood flow with PET: Ready for clinical application , 2012, Journal of Nuclear Cardiology.

[22]  Michael Fiechter,et al.  Diagnostic Value of 13N-Ammonia Myocardial Perfusion PET: Added Value of Myocardial Flow Reserve , 2012, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[23]  K. Gould,et al.  Integrating noninvasive absolute flow, coronary flow reserve, and ischemic thresholds into a comprehensive map of physiological severity. , 2012, JACC. Cardiovascular imaging.

[24]  R. Kirkeeide,et al.  Is discordance of coronary flow reserve and fractional flow reserve due to methodology or clinically relevant coronary pathophysiology? , 2012, JACC. Cardiovascular imaging.

[25]  Mika Teräs,et al.  Clinical Value of Absolute Quantification of Myocardial Perfusion With 15O-Water in Coronary Artery Disease , 2011, Circulation. Cardiovascular imaging.

[26]  M. Lubberink,et al.  Coronary risk factors and myocardial blood flow in patients evaluated for coronary artery disease: a quantitative [15O]H2O PET/CT study , 2011, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[27]  Nils P Johnson,et al.  Physiological basis for angina and ST-segment change PET-verified thresholds of quantitative stress myocardial perfusion and coronary flow reserve. , 2011, JACC. Cardiovascular imaging.

[28]  E. Antman,et al.  2011 ACCF/AHA Focused Update Incorporated Into the ACC/AHA 2007 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Unstable Angina/Non–ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A Report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines , 2011, Circulation.

[29]  K. Gould,et al.  Impact of unexpected factors on quantitative myocardial perfusion and coronary flow reserve in young, asymptomatic volunteers. , 2011, JACC. Cardiovascular imaging.

[30]  Ewout W Steyerberg,et al.  Extensions of net reclassification improvement calculations to measure usefulness of new biomarkers , 2011, Statistics in medicine.

[31]  H. Sipilä,et al.  Cardiac Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography Imaging Accurately Detects Anatomically and Functionally Significant Coronary Artery Disease , 2010, Circulation.

[32]  Sanjay Kaul,et al.  Low diagnostic yield of elective coronary angiography. , 2010, The New England journal of medicine.

[33]  M. Lubberink,et al.  Low-Dose Quantitative Myocardial Blood Flow Imaging Using 15O-Water and PET Without Attenuation Correction , 2010, Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[34]  A. Fischman,et al.  Comparison of positron emission tomography measurement of adenosine-stimulated absolute myocardial blood flow versus relative myocardial tracer content for physiological assessment of coronary artery stenosis severity and location. , 2009, JACC. Cardiovascular imaging.

[35]  M. Pencina,et al.  Evaluating the added predictive ability of a new marker: From area under the ROC curve to reclassification and beyond , 2008, Statistics in medicine.

[36]  Richard B Devereux,et al.  Recommendations for chamber quantification: a report from the American Society of Echocardiography's Guidelines and Standards Committee and the Chamber Quantification Writing Group, developed in conjunction with the European Association of Echocardiography, a branch of the European Society of Cardio , 2005, Journal of the American Society of Echocardiography : official publication of the American Society of Echocardiography.

[37]  K. Kanmatsuse,et al.  Mismatch between results of myocardial fractional flow reserve (FFR) measurements and myocardial perfusion SPECT for identification of the severity of ischemia: pitfall of FFR in patients with prior myocardial infarction. , 2004, Japanese heart journal.

[38]  O. Rimoldi,et al.  Heterogeneity of resting and hyperemic myocardial blood flow in healthy humans. , 2001, Cardiovascular research.

[39]  M. Schwaiger,et al.  Assessment of diagnostic performance of quantitative flow measurements in normal subjects and patients with angiographically documented coronary artery disease by means of nitrogen-13 ammonia and positron emission tomography. , 1998, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[40]  P. H. van der Voort,et al.  Measurement of fractional flow reserve to assess the functional severity of coronary-artery stenoses. , 1996, The New England journal of medicine.

[41]  A Bol,et al.  Coronary flow reserve calculated from pressure measurements in humans. Validation with positron emission tomography. , 1994, Circulation.

[42]  D E Kuhl,et al.  Noninvasive quantification of regional blood flow in the human heart using N-13 ammonia and dynamic positron emission tomographic imaging. , 1990, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[43]  R. Smalling,et al.  Regional myocardial function is not affected by severe coronary depressurization provided coronary blood flow is maintained. , 1985, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[44]  R. Frye,et al.  A reporting system on patients evaluated for coronary artery disease. Report of the Ad Hoc Committee for Grading of Coronary Artery Disease, Council on Cardiovascular Surgery, American Heart Association. , 1975, Circulation.

[45]  F. Crea,et al.  Coronary microvascular dysfunction in patients without myocardial diseases and obstructive atherosclerosis , 2014 .

[46]  W. Fearon,et al.  Invasive coronary microcirculation assessment--current status of index of microcirculatory resistance. , 2014, Circulation journal : official journal of the Japanese Circulation Society.

[47]  Helmut Baumgartner,et al.  ESC / EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization , 2014 .

[48]  D. DeMets,et al.  2012 ACCF/AHA focused update incorporated into the ACCF/AHA 2007 guidelines for the management of patients with unstable angina/non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. , 2013, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[49]  R. Whitbourn,et al.  Calculation of the index of microcirculatory resistance without coronary wedge pressure measurement in the presence of epicardial stenosis. , 2013, JACC. Cardiovascular interventions.

[50]  N. Tamaki,et al.  Myocardial Blood Flow Quantification Using Positron-Emission Tomography , 2013 .

[51]  B. Gersh,et al.  Angiographic Versus Functional Severity of Coronary Artery Stenoses in the FAME Study: Fractional Flow Reserve Versus Angiography in Multivessel Evaluation , 2011 .