TY - JOUR
T1 - Sex Differences in Adenosine-Free Coronary Pressure Indexes
T2 - A CONTRAST Substudy
AU - CONTRAST Study Investigators
AU - Shah, Sonia V.
AU - Zimmermann, Frederik M.
AU - Johnson, Nils P.
AU - Nishi, Takeshi
AU - Kobayashi, Yuhei
AU - Witt, Nils
AU - Berry, Colin
AU - Jeremias, Allen
AU - Koo, Bon Kwon
AU - Esposito, Giovanni
AU - Rioufol, Gilles
AU - Park, Seung Jung
AU - Oldroyd, Keith G.
AU - Barbato, Emanuele
AU - Pijls, Nico H.J.
AU - De Bruyne, Bernard
AU - Fearon, William F.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 American College of Cardiology Foundation
PY - 2018/8/13
Y1 - 2018/8/13
N2 - Objectives: The goal of this study was to investigate sex differences in adenosine-free coronary pressure indexes. Background: Several adenosine-free coronary pressure wire indexes have been proposed to assess the functional significance of coronary artery lesions; however, there is a theoretical concern that sex differences may affect diagnostic performance because of differences in resting flow and distal myocardial mass. Methods: In this CONTRAST (Can Contrast Injection Better Approximate FFR Compared to Pure Resting Physiology?) substudy, contrast fractional flow reserve (cFFR), obtained during contrast-induced submaximal hyperemia, the instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR), and distal/proximal coronary pressure ratio (Pd/Pa) were compared with fractional flow reserve (FFR) in 547 men and 216 women. Using FFR ≤0.8 as a reference, the diagnostic performance of each index was compared. Results: Men and women had similar diameter stenosis (p = 0.78), but women were less likely to have FFR ≤0.80 than men (42.5% vs. 51.5%, p = 0.04). Sensitivity was similar among cFFR, iFR, and Pd/Pa when comparing women and men, respectively (cFFR, 77.5% vs. 75.3%; p = 0.69; iFR, 84.9% vs. 79.4%; p = 0.30; Pd/Pa, 78.8% vs. 77.3%; p = 0.78). cFFR was more specific than iFR or Pd/Pa regardless of sex (cFFR, 94.3% vs. 95.8%; p = 0.56; iFR, 75.6% vs. 80.1%; p = 0.38; Pd/Pa, 80.6% vs. 78.7%; p = 0.69). By receiver-operating characteristic curve analysis, cFFR provided better diagnostic accuracy than resting indexes irrespective of sex (p ≤ 0.0001). Conclusions: Despite the theoretical concern, the diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of cFFR, iFR, and Pd/Pa did not differ between the sexes. Irrespective of sex, cFFR provides the best diagnostic performance.
AB - Objectives: The goal of this study was to investigate sex differences in adenosine-free coronary pressure indexes. Background: Several adenosine-free coronary pressure wire indexes have been proposed to assess the functional significance of coronary artery lesions; however, there is a theoretical concern that sex differences may affect diagnostic performance because of differences in resting flow and distal myocardial mass. Methods: In this CONTRAST (Can Contrast Injection Better Approximate FFR Compared to Pure Resting Physiology?) substudy, contrast fractional flow reserve (cFFR), obtained during contrast-induced submaximal hyperemia, the instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR), and distal/proximal coronary pressure ratio (Pd/Pa) were compared with fractional flow reserve (FFR) in 547 men and 216 women. Using FFR ≤0.8 as a reference, the diagnostic performance of each index was compared. Results: Men and women had similar diameter stenosis (p = 0.78), but women were less likely to have FFR ≤0.80 than men (42.5% vs. 51.5%, p = 0.04). Sensitivity was similar among cFFR, iFR, and Pd/Pa when comparing women and men, respectively (cFFR, 77.5% vs. 75.3%; p = 0.69; iFR, 84.9% vs. 79.4%; p = 0.30; Pd/Pa, 78.8% vs. 77.3%; p = 0.78). cFFR was more specific than iFR or Pd/Pa regardless of sex (cFFR, 94.3% vs. 95.8%; p = 0.56; iFR, 75.6% vs. 80.1%; p = 0.38; Pd/Pa, 80.6% vs. 78.7%; p = 0.69). By receiver-operating characteristic curve analysis, cFFR provided better diagnostic accuracy than resting indexes irrespective of sex (p ≤ 0.0001). Conclusions: Despite the theoretical concern, the diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of cFFR, iFR, and Pd/Pa did not differ between the sexes. Irrespective of sex, cFFR provides the best diagnostic performance.
KW - contrast fractional flow reserve
KW - fractional flow reserve
KW - sex differences
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85053818284&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85053818284&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jcin.2018.03.030
DO - 10.1016/j.jcin.2018.03.030
M3 - Article
C2 - 30031722
AN - SCOPUS:85053818284
SN - 1936-8798
VL - 11
SP - 1454
EP - 1463
JO - JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions
JF - JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions
IS - 15
ER -