FFR CT and Static Computed Tomography Myocardial Perfusion Imaging for Therapeutic Decision-making and Prognosis in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease.

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of integrated evaluation of resting static computed tomography perfusion (CTP) and coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA)-derived fractional flow reserve (FFR CT ) on therapeutic decision-making and predicting major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) in patients with suspected coronary artery disease. In this post hoc analysis of a prospective trial of CCTA in patients assigned to either CCTA or CCTA plus FFR CT arms, 500 patients in the CCTA plus FFR CT arm were analyzed. Both resting static CTP and FFR CT were evaluated by using the conventional CCTA. Perfusion defects in the myocardial segments with ≥50% degree of stenosis in the supplying vessels were defined as resting static CTP positive, and any vessel with an FFR CT value of ≤0.80 was considered positive. Patients were divided into 3 groups: (1) negative CTP-FFR CT match group (resting static CTP-negative and FFR CT -negative group); (2) mismatch CTP-FFR CT group (resting static CTP-positive and FFR CT -negative or resting static CTP-negative and FFR CT -positive group); and (3) positive CTP-FFR CT match group (resting static CTP-positive and FFR CT -positive group). We compared the revascularization-to-invasive coronary angiography ratio and the MACE rate among 3 subgroups at 1- and 3-year follow-ups. The adjusted Cox hazard proportional model was used to assess the prognostic value of FFR CT and resting static CTP to determine patients at risk of MACE. Patients in the positive CTP-FFR CT match group were more likely to undergo revascularization at the time of invasive coronary angiography compared with those in the mismatch CTP-FFR CT group (81.4% vs 57.7%, P =0.033) and the negative CTP-FFR CT match group (81.4% vs 33.3%, P= 0.001). At 1- and 3-year follow-ups, patients in the positive CTP-FFR CT match group were more likely to have MACE than those in the mismatch CTP-FFR CT group (10.5% vs 4.2%, P= 0.046; 35.6% vs 9.4%, P <0.001) and the negative CTP-FFR CT match group (10.5% vs 0.9%, P <0.001; 35.6% vs 5.4%, P <0.001). A positive CTP-FFR CT match was strongly related to MACE at 1-year (hazard ratio=8.06, P= 0.003) and 3-year (hazard ratio=6.23, P <0.001) follow-ups. In patients with suspected coronary artery disease, the combination of FFR CT with resting static CTP could guide therapeutic decisions and have a better prognosis with fewer MACE in a real-world scenario.