Invasive Fractional-flow-reserve Prediction by Coronary CT Angiography Using Artificial Intelligence Vs. Computational Fluid Dynamics Software in Intermediate-grade Stenosis

Overview

Journal Int J Cardiovasc Imaging

Publisher Springer

Specialty Radiology

Date 2024 Jul 4

PMID 38963591

Authors

Benjamin Peters

Jean-Francois Paul

Rolf Symons

Wouter M A Franssen

Alain Nchimi

Olivier Ghekiere

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Coronary computed angiography (CCTA) with non-invasive fractional flow reserve (FFR) calculates lesion-specific ischemia when compared with invasive FFR and can be considered for patients with stable chest pain and intermediate-grade stenoses according to recent guidelines. The objective of this study was to compare a new CCTA-based artificial-intelligence deep-learning model for FFR prediction (FFR) to computational fluid dynamics CT-derived FFR (FFR) in patients with intermediate-grade coronary stenoses with FFR as reference standard. The FFR model was trained with curved multiplanar-reconstruction CCTA images of 500 stenotic vessels in 413 patients, using FFR measurements as the ground truth. We included 37 patients with 39 intermediate-grade stenoses on CCTA and invasive coronary angiography, and with FFR and FFR measurements in this retrospective proof of concept study. FFR was compared with FFR regarding the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and diagnostic accuracy for predicting FFR ≤ 0.80. Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and diagnostic accuracy of FFR in predicting FFR ≤ 0.80 were 91% (10/11), 82% (23/28), 67% (10/15), 96% (23/24), and 85% (33/39), respectively. Corresponding values for FFR were 82% (9/11), 75% (21/28), 56% (9/16), 91% (21/23), and 77% (30/39), respectively. Diagnostic accuracy did not differ significantly between FFR and FFR (p = 0.12). FFR performed similarly to FFR for predicting intermediate-grade coronary stenoses with FFR ≤ 0.80. These findings suggest FFR as a potential non-invasive imaging tool for guiding therapeutic management in these stenoses.

Citing Articles

Advancements in Cardiac CT Imaging: The Era of Artificial Intelligence.

Costantini P, Groenhoff L, Ostillio E, Coraducci F, Secchi F, Carriero A Echocardiography. 2024; 41(12):e70042.

PMID: 39584228 PMC: 11586826. DOI: 10.1111/echo.70042.

References

Knuuti J, Wijns W, Saraste A, Capodanno D, Barbato E, Funck-Brentano C . 2019 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of chronic coronary syndromes. Eur Heart J. 2019; 41(3):407-477. DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehz425. View

Gulati M, Levy P, Mukherjee D, Amsterdam E, Bhatt D, Birtcher K . 2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2021; 16(1):54-122. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcct.2021.11.009. View

Ghekiere O, Dewilde W, Bellekens M, Hoa D, Couvreur T, Djekic J . Diagnostic performance of quantitative coronary computed tomography angiography and quantitative coronary angiography to predict hemodynamic significance of intermediate-grade stenoses. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2015; 31(8):1651-61. DOI: 10.1007/s10554-015-0748-1. View

Lawton J, Tamis-Holland J, Bangalore S, Bates E, Beckie T, Bischoff J . 2021 ACC/AHA/SCAI Guideline for Coronary Artery Revascularization: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines. Circulation. 2021; 145(3):e18-e114. DOI: 10.1161/CIR.0000000000001038. View

Paul J, Rohnean A, Giroussens H, Pressat-Laffouilhere T, Wong T . Evaluation of a deep learning model on coronary CT angiography for automatic stenosis detection. Diagn Interv Imaging. 2022; 103(6):316-323. DOI: 10.1016/j.diii.2022.01.004. View

Zreik M, van Hamersvelt R, Wolterink J, Leiner T, Viergever M, Isgum I . A Recurrent CNN for Automatic Detection and Classification of Coronary Artery Plaque and Stenosis in Coronary CT Angiography. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2018; 38(7):1588-1598. DOI: 10.1109/TMI.2018.2883807. View

Kumamaru K, Fujimoto S, Otsuka Y, Kawasaki T, Kawaguchi Y, Kato E . Diagnostic accuracy of 3D deep-learning-based fully automated estimation of patient-level minimum fractional flow reserve from coronary computed tomography angiography. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2019; 21(4):437-445. DOI: 10.1093/ehjci/jez160. View

Ghekiere O, Bielen J, Leipsic J, Dewilde W, Mancini I, Hansen D . Correlation of FFR-derived from CT and stress perfusion CMR with invasive FFR in intermediate-grade coronary artery stenosis. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2018; 35(3):559-568. DOI: 10.1007/s10554-018-1464-4. View

Neumann F, Sousa-Uva M, Ahlsson A, Alfonso F, Banning A, Benedetto U . 2018 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization. Eur Heart J. 2018; 40(2):87-165. DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehy394. View

10.

Tesche C, De Cecco C, Albrecht M, Duguay T, Bayer 2nd R, Litwin S . Coronary CT Angiography-derived Fractional Flow Reserve. Radiology. 2017; 285(1):17-33. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2017162641. View

11.

Kruk M, Wardziak L, Demkow M, Pleban W, Pregowski J, Dzielinska Z . Workstation-Based Calculation of CTA-Based FFR for Intermediate Stenosis. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2016; 9(6):690-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcmg.2015.09.019. View

12.

Nakazato R, Park H, Berman D, Gransar H, Koo B, Erglis A . Noninvasive fractional flow reserve derived from computed tomography angiography for coronary lesions of intermediate stenosis severity: results from the DeFACTO study. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2013; 6(6):881-9. DOI: 10.1161/CIRCIMAGING.113.000297. View

13.

Zreik M, van Hamersvelt R, Khalili N, Wolterink J, Voskuil M, Viergever M . Deep Learning Analysis of Coronary Arteries in Cardiac CT Angiography for Detection of Patients Requiring Invasive Coronary Angiography. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2019; 39(5):1545-1557. DOI: 10.1109/TMI.2019.2953054. View

14.

Futoma J, Simons M, Panch T, Doshi-Velez F, Celi L . The myth of generalisability in clinical research and machine learning in health care. Lancet Digit Health. 2020; 2(9):e489-e492. PMC: 7444947. DOI: 10.1016/S2589-7500(20)30186-2. View

15.

Liao J, Huang L, Qu M, Chen B, Wang G . Artificial Intelligence in Coronary CT Angiography: Current Status and Future Prospects. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2022; 9:896366. PMC: 9247240. DOI: 10.3389/fcvm.2022.896366. View

16.

Min J, Leipsic J, Pencina M, Berman D, Koo B, Van Mieghem C . Diagnostic accuracy of fractional flow reserve from anatomic CT angiography. JAMA. 2012; 308(12):1237-45. PMC: 4281479. DOI: 10.1001/2012.jama.11274. View

17.

Norgaard B, Leipsic J, Gaur S, Seneviratne S, Ko B, Ito H . Diagnostic performance of noninvasive fractional flow reserve derived from coronary computed tomography angiography in suspected coronary artery disease: the NXT trial (Analysis of Coronary Blood Flow Using CT Angiography: Next Steps). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014; 63(12):1145-1155. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2013.11.043. View

18.

Kang D, Ahn J, Lee C, Lee P, Park D, Kang S . Deferred vs. performed revascularization for coronary stenosis with grey-zone fractional flow reserve values: data from the IRIS-FFR registry. Eur Heart J. 2018; 39(18):1610-1619. DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehy079. View

19.

Johnson N, Toth G, Lai D, Zhu H, Acar G, Agostoni P . Prognostic value of fractional flow reserve: linking physiologic severity to clinical outcomes. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014; 64(16):1641-54. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2014.07.973. View

20.

Zimmermann F, Ferrara A, Johnson N, van Nunen L, Escaned J, Albertsson P . Deferral vs. performance of percutaneous coronary intervention of functionally non-significant coronary stenosis: 15-year follow-up of the DEFER trial. Eur Heart J. 2015; 36(45):3182-8. DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehv452. View