Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://olympias.lib.uoi.gr/jspui/handle/123456789/20095Full metadata record
| DC Field | Value | Language |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.author | Christou, M. A. | en |
| dc.contributor.author | Siontis, G. C. | en |
| dc.contributor.author | Katritsis, D. G. | en |
| dc.contributor.author | Ioannidis, J. P. | en |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2015-11-24T19:04:44Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2015-11-24T19:04:44Z | - |
| dc.identifier.issn | 0002-9149 | - |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://olympias.lib.uoi.gr/jspui/handle/123456789/20095 | - |
| dc.rights | Default Licence | - |
| dc.subject | Blood Flow Velocity | en |
| dc.subject | Coronary Angiography/*methods | en |
| dc.subject | *Coronary Circulation | en |
| dc.subject | Diagnostic Imaging | en |
| dc.subject | Humans | en |
| dc.subject | Myocardial Ischemia/*radiography | en |
| dc.subject | ROC Curve | en |
| dc.subject | Sensitivity and Specificity | en |
| dc.title | Meta-analysis of fractional flow reserve versus quantitative coronary angiography and noninvasive imaging for evaluation of myocardial ischemia | en |
| heal.type | journalArticle | - |
| heal.type.en | Journal article | en |
| heal.type.el | Άρθρο Περιοδικού | el |
| heal.identifier.primary | 10.1016/j.amjcard.2006.09.092 | - |
| heal.identifier.secondary | http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17293182 | - |
| heal.identifier.secondary | http://ac.els-cdn.com/S0002914906021436/1-s2.0-S0002914906021436-main.pdf?_tid=8b417a790d8b302d842ff4e2adc58938&acdnat=1333363960_82cf0038d43d4090cdb5e03c26e2a4eb | - |
| heal.language | en | - |
| heal.access | campus | - |
| heal.recordProvider | Πανεπιστήμιο Ιωαννίνων. Σχολή Επιστημών Υγείας. Τμήμα Ιατρικής | el |
| heal.publicationDate | 2007 | - |
| heal.abstract | We performed a meta-analysis of 31 studies comparing the results of fractional flow reserve (FFR) against quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) and/or noninvasive imaging of the same lesions. Studies were retrieved from PubMed (last search February 2006). Across 18 studies (1,522 lesions), QCA had a random effects sensitivity of 78% (95% confidence interval [CI] 67 to 86) and specificity of 51% (95% CI 40 to 61) against FFR (0.75 cutoff). Overall concordances were 61% for lesions with diameter stenosis 30% to 70%, 67% for stenoses >70%, and 95% for stenoses <30%. Compared with noninvasive imaging (21 studies, 1,249 lesions), FFR had a sensitivity of 76% (95% CI 69 to 82) and specificity of 76% (95% CI 71 to 81) by random effects. Summary receiver-operator characteristic estimates were similar. Most data addressed comparisons with perfusion scintigraphy (976 lesions, sensitivity 75%, specificity 77%), and some data were also available for dobutamine stress echocardiography (273 lesions, sensitivity 82%, specificity 74%). In conclusion, QCA does not predict the functional significance of coronary lesions. FFR shows modest concordance with noninvasive imaging tests. The prognostic implications of discordant FFR and imaging results need further study. | en |
| heal.journalName | Am J Cardiol | en |
| heal.journalType | peer-reviewed | - |
| heal.fullTextAvailability | TRUE | - |
| Appears in Collections: | Άρθρα σε επιστημονικά περιοδικά ( Ανοικτά) - ΙΑΤ | |
Files in This Item:
| File | Description | Size | Format | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Christou-2007-Meta-analysis of fra.pdf | 194.22 kB | Adobe PDF | View/Open Request a copy |
This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License
