Information about the 2019 Novel Coronavirus
OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study was to investigate sex differences in adenosine-free coronary pressure indexes.BACKGROUND: Several adenosine-free coronary pressure wire indexes have been proposed to assess the functional significance of coronary artery lesions; however, there is a theoretical concern that sex differences may affect diagnostic performance because of differences in resting flow and distal myocardial mass.METHODS: In this CONTRAST (Can Contrast Injection Better Approximate FFR Compared to Pure Resting Physiology?) substudy, contrast fractional flow reserve (cFFR), obtained during contrast-induced submaximal hyperemia, the instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR), and distal/proximal coronary pressure ratio (Pd/Pa) were compared with fractional flow reserve (FFR) in 547 men and 216 women. Using FFR=0.8 as a reference, the diagnostic performance of each index was compared.RESULTS: Men and women had similar diameter stenosis (p= 0.78), but women were less likely to have FFR=0.80 than men (42.5% vs. 51.5%, p= 0.04). Sensitivity was similar among cFFR, iFR, and Pd/Pa when comparing women and men, respectively (cFFR, 77.5% vs. 75.3%, p= 0.69; iFR, 84.9% vs. 79.4%, p= 0.30; Pd/Pa, 78.8% vs. 77.3%, p= 0.78). cFFR was more specific than iFR or Pd/Pa regardless of sex (cFFR, 94.3% vs. 95.8%, p= 0.56; iFR, 75.6% vs. 80.1%, p= 0.38; Pd/Pa, 80.6% vs. 78.7%, p= 0.69). By receiver-operating characteristic curve analysis, cFFR provided better diagnostic accuracy than resting indexes irrespective of sex (p= 0.0001).CONCLUSIONS: Despite the theoretical concern, the diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of cFFR, iFR, and Pd/Pa did not differ between the sexes. Irrespective of sex, cFFR provides the best diagnostic performance.
View details for PubMedID 30031722