Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 197
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once
98%
921
2 minutes
20
Background: Coronary CT angiography (CCTA) is well-established for diagnosis and stratification of coronary artery disease (CAD). Its usefulness in guiding percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) and stent sizing is unknown.
Methods: This is a sub-analysis of the Precise Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Plan (P3) study (NCT03782688). We analyzed 65 vessels with matched CCTA and pre-PCI optical coherence tomography (OCT) assessment. The CCTA-guided stent size was defined by the mean distal reference lumen diameter rounded up to the nearest stent diameter. The OCT lumen-guided stent size was the mean distal reference lumen diameter rounded to the closest stent diameter. The agreement on stent diameters was determined with Kappa statistics, Passing-Bablok regression analysis, and the Bland-Altman method.
Results: The distal reference lumen diameter by CCTA and OCT were 2.75 ± 0.53 mm and 2.72 ± 0.55 mm (mean difference 0.06, limits of agreement -0.7 to 0.82). There were no proportional or systematic differences (coefficient A 1.06, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.3 and coefficient B -0.22, 95% CI -0.83 to 0.36) between methods. The agreement between the CCTA and OCT stent size was substantial (Cohen's weighted Kappa 0.74, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.85). Compared to OCT stent diameter, CCTA stent size was concordant in 52.3% of the cases; CCTA overestimated stent size in 20.0% and underestimated in 27.7%.
Conclusion: CCTA accurately assessed the reference vessel diameter used for stent sizing. CCTA-based stent sizing showed a substantial agreement with OCT. CCTA allows for PCI planning and may aid in selecting stent diameter.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcct.2024.03.002 | DOI Listing |