Anatomical and Functional Approaches in the Assessment of Ischemia in Ischemic Heart Disease: Analysis of Major World Research
https://doi.org/10.18087/cardio.2022.10.n1442
Abstract
This review provides a chronology of major international studies of the effect of evaluating transient myocardial ischemia, including with radionuclide methods, and coronary stenosis on the choice of therapeutic strategy and prognosis for patients with ischemic and coronary disease. The authors discussed the rationales for using anatomic, functional, and perfusion visualization methods of noninvasive diagnostics in evaluation of patients with suspected or established ischemic heart disease.
Supporting agencies: No conflict of interest is reported.
About the Author
A. A. Ansheles
Chazov National Medical Research Center of Cardiology, Moscow
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Leading Researcher, Department of Radionuclide Diagnostics and PET Doctor of Medical Science
References
1. Fihn SD, Gardin JM, Abrams J, Berra K, Blankenship JC, Dallas AP et al. 2012 ACCF/AHA/ACP/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart Disease: Executive Summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines, and the American College of Physicians, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, Preventive Cardiovascular Nurses Association, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Circulation. 2012;126(25):3097–137. DOI: 10.1161/CIR.0b013e3182776f83
2. Montalescot G, Sechtem W, Achenbach S, Andreotti F, Arden C, Budaj A et al. 2013 ESC guidelines on the management of stable coronary artery disease: The Task Force on the management of stable coronary artery disease of the European Society of Cardiology. European Heart Journal. 2013;34(38):2949–3003. DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/eht296
3. Hachamovitch R, Berman DS, Shaw LJ, Kiat H, Cohen I, Cabico JA et al. Incremental Prognostic Value of Myocardial Perfusion Single Photon Emission Computed Tomography for the Prediction of Cardiac Death: Differential Stratification for Risk of Cardiac Death and Myocardial Infarction. Circulation. 1998;97(6):535–43. DOI: 10.1161/01.CIR.97.6.535
4. Shaw LJ, Hendel R, Borges-Neto S, Lauer MS, Alazraki N, Burnette J et al. Prognostic value of normal exercise and adenosine (99m)Tctetrofosmin SPECT imaging: results from the multicenter registry of 4,728 patients. Journal of Nuclear Medicine. 2003;44(2):134–9. PMID: 12571200
5. Hachamovitch R, Hayes SW, Friedman JD, Cohen I, Berman DS. Comparison of the Short-Term Survival Benefit Associated With Revascularization Compared With Medical Therapy in Patients With No Prior Coronary Artery Disease Undergoing Stress Myocardial Perfusion Single Photon Emission Computed Tomography. Circulation. 2003;107(23):2900–7. DOI: 10.1161/01.CIR.0000072790.23090.41
6. Hachamovitch R, Hayes SW, Friedman JD, Cohen I, Berman DS. Stress myocardial perfusion single-photon emission computed tomography is clinically effective and cost effective in risk stratification of patients with a high likelihood of coronary artery disease (CAD) but no known CAD. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2004;43(2):200–8. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2003.07.043
7. Shaw LJ, Berman DS, Maron DJ, Mancini GBJ, Hayes SW, Hartigan PM et al. Optimal Medical Therapy With or Without Percutaneous Coronary Intervention to Reduce Ischemic Burden: Results From the Clinical Outcomes Utilizing Revascularization and Aggressive Drug Evaluation (COURAGE) Trial Nuclear Substudy. Circulation. 2008;117(10):1283–91. DOI: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.107.743963
8. Frye RL, August P, Brooks MM, Hardison RM, Kelsey SF, MacGregor JM et al. A Randomized Trial of Therapies for Type 2 Diabetes and Coronary Artery Disease. New England Journal of Medicine. 2009;360(24):2503–15. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa0805796
9. Dweck MR, Toor I, Flapan AD, Fox KA, Newby DE. Is myocardial ischemia really bad for you? Expert Review of Cardiovascular Therapy. 2014;12(2):131–4. DOI: 10.1586/14779072.2014.874285
10. Neumann F-J, Sousa-Uva M, Ahlsson A, Alfonso F, Banning AP, Benedetto U et al. 2018 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization. European Heart Journal. 2019;40(2):87–165. DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehy394
11. Reynolds HR, Picard MH, Hochman JS. Does Ischemia Burden in Stable Coronary Artery Disease Effectively Identify Revascularization Candidates? Ischemia Burden in Stable Coronary Artery Disease Does Not Effectively Identify Revascularization Candidates. Circulation: Cardiovascular Imaging. 2015;8(5):e000362. DOI: 10.1161/CIRCIMAGING.113.000362
12. Min JK, Shaw LJ. Noninvasive Diagnostic and Prognostic Assessment of Individuals With Suspected Coronary Artery Disease: Coronary Computed Tomographic Angiography Perspective. Circulation: Cardiovascular Imaging. 2008;1(3):270–81. DOI: 10.1161/CIRCIMAGING.108.823807
13. Abdulla J, Abildstrom SZ, Gotzsche O, Christensen E, Kober L, Torp-Pedersen C. 64-multislice detector computed tomography coronary angiography as potential alternative to conventional coronary angiography: a systematic review and meta-analysis. European Heart Journal. 2007;28(24):3042–50. DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehm466
14. Budoff MJ, Dowe D, Jollis JG, Gitter M, Sutherland J, Halamert E et al. Diagnostic Performance of 64-Multidetector Row Coronary Computed Tomographic Angiography for Evaluation of Coronary Artery Stenosis in Individuals Without Known Coronary Artery Disease. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2008;52(21):1724–32. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2008.07.031
15. Lewis MA, Pascoal A, Keevil SF, Lewis CA. Selecting a CT scanner for cardiac imaging: the heart of the matter. The British Journal of Radiology. 2016;89(1065):20160376. DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20160376
16. Sato A, Hiroe M, Tamura M, Ohigashi H, Nozato T, Hikita H et al. Quantitative Measures of Coronary Stenosis Severity by 64-Slice CT Angiography and Relation to Physiologic Significance of Perfusion in Nonobese Patients: Comparison with Stress Myocardial Perfusion Imaging. Journal of Nuclear Medicine. 2008;49(4):564–72. DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.107.042481
17. Ansheles A.A., Shulgin D.N., Solomyany V.V., Sergienko V.B. Comparison of stress-test, single-photon emission computed tomography, and coronarography results in IHD patients. Cardiological Bulletin. 2012;7(2):10–6.
18. Gaemperli O, Schepis T, Valenta I, Koepfli P, Husmann L, Scheffel H et al. Functionally Relevant Coronary Artery Disease: Comparison of 64-Section CT Angiography with Myocardial Perfusion SPECT. Radiology. 2008;248(2):414–23. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2482071307
19. Ansheles A.A. Methods of hybrid single-photon emission computed tomography in cardiology. Doct. thesis. M., 2018. Av. at: https://search.rsl.ru/ru/record/01008715966.
20. Djaberi R, Roodt JO, Schuijf JD, Rabelink TJ, de Koning EJ, Pereira AM et al. Endothelial Dysfunction in Diabetic Patients with Abnormal Myocardial Perfusion in the Absence of Epicardial Obstructive Coronary Artery Disease. Journal of Nuclear Medicine. 2009;50(12):1980–6. DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.109.065193
21. Douglas PS, Hoffmann U, Patel MR, Mark DB, Al-Khalidi HR, Cavanaugh B et al. Outcomes of Anatomical versus Functional Testing for Coronary Artery Disease. New England Journal of Medicine. 2015;372(14):1291–300. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1415516
22. Mark DB, Federspiel JJ, Cowper PA, Anstrom KJ, Hoffmann U, Patel MR et al. Economic Outcomes With Anatomical Versus Functional Diagnostic Testing for Coronary Artery Disease. Annals of Internal Medicine. 2016;165(2):94–102. DOI: 10.7326/M15-2639
23. Tonino PAL, De Bruyne B, Pijls NHJ, Siebert U, Ikeno F, van `t Veer M et al. Fractional Flow Reserve versus Angiography for Guiding Percutaneous Coronary Intervention. New England Journal of Medicine. 2009;360(3):213–24. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa0807611
24. Pijls NHJ, van Schaardenburgh P, Manoharan G, Boersma E, Bech J-W, van’t Veer M et al. Percutaneous Coronary Intervention of Functionally Nonsignificant Stenosis: 5-year follow-up of the DEFER Study. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2007;49(21):2105–11. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2007.01.087
25. van Nunen LX, Zimmermann FM, Tonino PAL, Barbato E, Baumbach A, Engstrøm T et al. Fractional flow reserve versus angiography for guidance of PCI in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (FAME): 5-year follow-up of a randomised controlled trial. The Lancet. 2015;386(10006):1853–60. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)00057-4
26. De Bruyne B, Pijls NHJ, Kalesan B, Barbato E, Tonino PAL, Piroth Z et al. Fractional Flow Reserve–Guided PCI versus Medical Therapy in Stable Coronary Disease. New England Journal of Medicine.2012;367(11):991–1001. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1205361
27. Pijls NHJ, Sels J-WEM. Functional Measurement of Coronary Stenosis. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2012;59(12):1045–57. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2011.09.077
28. De Bruyne B, Fearon WF, Pijls NHJ, Barbato E, Tonino P, Piroth Z et al. Fractional Flow Reserve–Guided PCI for Stable Coronary Artery Disease. New England Journal of Medicine. 2014;371(13):1208–17. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1408758
29. Wolk MJ, Bailey SR, Doherty JU, Douglas PS, Hendel RC, Kramer CM et al. ACCF/AHA/ASE/ASNC/HFSA/HRS/SCAI/SCCT/SCMR/STS 2013 Multimodality Appropriate Use Criteria for the Detection and Risk Assessment of Stable Ischemic Heart Disease. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2014;63(4):380–406. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2013.11.009
30. Hachamovitch R, Nutter B, Hlatky MA, Shaw LJ, Ridner ML, Dorbala S et al. Patient Management After Noninvasive Cardiac Imaging results from SPARC (Study of myocardial perfusion and coronary anatomy imaging roles in coronary artery disease). Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2012;59(5):462–74. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2011.09.066
31. Neglia D, Rovai D, Caselli C, Pietila M, Teresinska A, Aguadé-Bruix S et al. Detection of Significant Coronary Artery Disease by Noninvasive Anatomical and Functional Imaging. Circulation: Cardiovascular Imaging. 2015;8(3):e002179. DOI: 10.1161/CIRCIMAGING.114.002179
32. Hannan EL, Cozzens K, Samadashvili Z, Walford G, Jacobs AK, Holmes DR et al. Appropriateness of Coronary Revascularization for Patients Without Acute Coronary Syndromes. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2012;59(21):1870–6. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2012.01.050
33. Chan PS, Patel MR, Klein LW, Krone RJ, Dehmer GJ, Kennedy K et al. Appropriateness of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention. JAMA. 2011;306(1):53–61. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2011.916
34. Lin GA. Frequency of Stress Testing to Document Ischemia Prior to Elective Percutaneous Coronary Intervention. JAMA. 2008;300(15):1765–73. DOI: 10.1001/jama.300.15.1765
35. Ko DT, Guo H, Wijeysundera HC, Natarajan MK, Nagpal AD, Feindel CM et al. Assessing the Association of Appropriateness of Coronary Revascularization and Clinical Outcomes for Patients With Stable Coronary Artery Disease. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2012;60(19):1876–84. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2012.06.056
Review
For citations:
Ansheles A.A. Anatomical and Functional Approaches in the Assessment of Ischemia in Ischemic Heart Disease: Analysis of Major World Research. Kardiologiia. 2022;62(10):66-73. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.18087/cardio.2022.10.n1442
Views:
819
Email this article 
Post a Comment 
