» Articles » PMID: 39739189

Noninvasive Machine-learning Models for the Detection of Lesion-specific Ischemia in Patients with Stable Angina with Intermediate Stenosis Severity on Coronary CT Angiography

Overview
Publisher Springer
Date 2024 Dec 31
PMID 39739189
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

This study proposed noninvasive machine-learning models for the detection of lesion-specific ischemia (LSI) in patients with stable angina with intermediate stenosis severity based on coronary computed tomography (CT) angiography. This single-center retrospective study analyzed 76 patients (99 vessels) with stable angina who underwent coronary CT angiography (CCTA) and had intermediate stenosis severity (40-69%) on invasive coronary angiography. LSI, defined as a resting full-cycle ratio < 0.86 or fractional flow reserve ≤ 0.80, was determined in 40 patients (46 vessels) using a hybrid resting full-cycle ratio-fractional flow reserve strategy. The resting full-cycle ratio and/or fractional flow reserve were measured using invasive coronary angiography as references for functional severity indices of coronary stenosis in the machine-learning models. LSI detection models were constructed using noninvasive machine-learning models that predicted the resting full-cycle ratio and fractional flow reserve by feeding machine-learning models with image features extracted from CCTA. The diagnostic performance of the proposed LSI detection models was assessed using a nested 10-fold cross-validation test. The LSI detection models with the highest diagnostic performance achieved an accuracy of 0.88 (95% CI: 0.81, 0.94), sensitivity of 0.78 (95% CI: 0.70, 0.86) and specificity of 0.96 (95% CI: 0.92, 1.00) on a vessel basis and 0.88 (95% CI: 0.81, 0.95), 0.80 (95% CI: 0.70, 0.86) and 0.97 (95% CI: 0.92, 1.00), respectively, on a patient basis. These findings suggest that LSI detection models with features extracted from CCTA can noninvasively detect LSI in patients with stable angina with intermediate stenosis severity.

References
1.
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

2.
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. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2021; 79(2):e21-e129. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2021.09.006. View

3.
Gould K, Lipscomb K, Hamilton G . Physiologic basis for assessing critical coronary stenosis. Instantaneous flow response and regional distribution during coronary hyperemia as measures of coronary flow reserve. Am J Cardiol. 1974; 33(1):87-94. DOI: 10.1016/0002-9149(74)90743-7. View

4.
Fischer J, Samady H, McPherson J, Sarembock I, Powers E, Gimple L . Comparison between visual assessment and quantitative angiography versus fractional flow reserve for native coronary narrowings of moderate severity. Am J Cardiol. 2002; 90(3):210-5. DOI: 10.1016/s0002-9149(02)02456-6. View

5.
Meijboom W, van Mieghem C, Van Pelt N, Weustink A, Pugliese F, Mollet N . Comprehensive assessment of coronary artery stenoses: computed tomography coronary angiography versus conventional coronary angiography and correlation with fractional flow reserve in patients with stable angina. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008; 52(8):636-43. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2008.05.024. View