Diagnostic accuracy of intravascular ultrasound‐derived minimal lumen area compared with fractional flow reserve—Meta‐analysis: Pooled accuracy of IVUS luminal area versus FFR
Year: 2013
Type: article
Study designs: Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis
Abstract: INTRODUCTION: Although intravascular ultrasound minimal luminal area (IVUS-MLA) is one of many anatomic determinants of lesion severity, it has been proposed as an alternative to fractional flow reserve (FFR) to assess severity of coronary artery disease. OBJECTIVE: Pool the diagnostic performance of IVUS-MLA and determine its overall accuracy to predict the functional significance of coronary disease using FFR (0.75 or 0.80) as the gold standard. METHODS: Studies comparing IVUS and FFR to establish the best MLA cutoff value that correlates with significant coronary stenosis were reviewed from a Medline search using the terms "fractional flow reserve" and "ultrasound." DerSimonian Laird method was applied to obtain pooled accuracy. RESULTS: Eleven clinical trials, including two left main (LM) trials (total N = 1,759 patients, 1,953 lesions) were included. The weighted overall mean MLA cutoff was 2.61 mm(2) in non-LM trials and 5.35 mm(2) in LM trials. For non-LM lesions, the pooled sensitivity of MLA was 0.79 (95% CI = 0.76-0.83) and specificity was 0.65 (95% CI = 0.62-0.67). Positive likelihood ratio (LR) was 2.26 (95% CI = 1.98-2.57) and LR- was 0.32 (95% CI = 0.24-0.44). Area under the summary receiver operator curve for all trials was 0.848. Pooled LM trials had better accuracy: sensitivity = 0.90, specificity = 0.90, LR+ = 8.79, and LR- = 0.120. CONCLUSION: Given its limited pooled accuracy, IVUS-MLA's impact on clinical decision in this scenario is low and may lead to misclassification in up to 20% of the lesions. Pooled analysis points toward lower MLA cutoffs than the ones used in current practice.
DOI: 10.1002/ccd.25047
Language: English
Subfield: Surgery
Field: Medicine
Domain: Health Sciences
Open Access status: bronze
OpenAlex ID: W1777018690