Influence of coronary stenosis location on diagnostic performance of machine learning-based fractional flow reserve from CT angiography

BackgroundCompared with invasive fractional flow reserve (FFR), coronary CT angiography (cCTA) is limited in detecting hemodynamically relevant lesions. cCTA-based FFR (CT-FFR) is an approach to overcome this insufficiency by use of computational fluid dynamics. Applying recent innovations in computer science, a machine learning (ML) method for CT-FFR derivation was introduced and showed improved diagnostic performance compared to cCTA alone. We sought to investigate the influence of stenosis location in the coronary artery system on the performance of ML-CT-FFR in a large, multicenter cohort.MethodsThree hundred and thirty patients (75.2% male, median age 63 years) with 502 coronary artery stenoses were included in this substudy of the MACHINE (Machine Learning Based CT Angiography Derived FFR: A Multi-Center Registry) registry. Correlation of ML-CT-FFR with the invasive reference standard FFR was assessed and pooled diagnostic performance of ML-CT-FFR and cCTA was determined separately for the following stenosis locations: RCA, LAD, LCX, proximal, middle, and distal vessel segments.ResultsML-CT-FFR correlated well with invasive FFR across the different stenosis locations. Per-lesion analysis revealed improved diagnostic accuracy of ML-CT-FFR compared with conventional cCTA for stenoses in the RCA (71.8% [95% confidence interval, 63.0%–79.5%] vs. 54.8% [45.7%–63.8%]), LAD (79.3 [73.9–84.0] vs. 59.6 [53.5–65.6]), LCX (84.1 [76.0–90.3] vs. 63.7 [54.1–72.6]), proximal (81.5 [74.6–87.1] vs. 63.8 [55.9–71.2]), middle (81.2 [75.7–85.9] vs. 59.4 [53.0–65.6]) and distal stenosis location (67.4 [57.0–76.6] vs. 51.6 [41.1–62.0]).ConclusionIn a multicenter cohort with high disease prevalence, ML-CT-FFR offered improved diagnostic performance over cCTA for detecting hemodynamically relevant stenoses regardless of their location.     

术中同期韧带修复治疗踝关节骨折伴三角韧带断裂疗效及预后影响因素探讨

目的探讨术中同期韧带修复治疗踝关节骨折伴三角韧带断裂疗效及预后影响因素。方法回顾性分析溧阳市人民医院2016年1月至2018年12月收治踝关节骨折伴三角韧带断裂患者共183例临床资料,其中未行同期韧带修复者共48例设为A组,术中行同期韧带修复者135例设为B组,而B组根据修复方式分为浅层修复(54例),深层修复(48例)及完全修复(33例);比较不同组术中出血量、住院时间、美国足踝外科学会(AOFAS)评分、视觉模拟评分法(VAS)评分、术后并发症发生率及矢状面足跟着地角度,采用Logistic回归模型进行预后影响因素分析。结果B组住院时间、VAS评分、术后并发症发生率及矢状面足跟着地角度均少于A组(P<0.05);B组AOFAS评分高于A组(P<0.05);B组冠状面和水平面足跟着地角度则高于A组(P<0.05);深层组和完全组AOFAS评分少于浅层组(P<0.05);深层组和完全组VAS评分显著高于浅层组(P<0.05);完全组术后并发症发生率高于浅层组(P<0.05);Logistic回归模型单因素分析结果显示,年龄、合并其他损伤、受伤至手术时间、深层及浅层修复均是患者临床预后影响因素(P<0.05);而多因素分析结果则显示,浅层修复是患者临床预后独立保护因素(P<0.05)。结论踝关节骨折伴三角韧带断裂患者术中同期行韧带修复可有效提高临床疗效,改善关节生物力学指标;其中行浅层修复三角韧带更有助于增加临床获益。