ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: There are some cases in whom a sufficient improvement in fractional flow reserve (FFR) could not be achieved even if anatomical results indicated satisfactory stent deployment. We investigated the relation of abnormal findings between intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) and coronary pressure pullback measurement (CP-PB). METHODS: IVUS and CP-PB were investigated after stent deployment in 60 vessels in 53 patients. CP-PB criterion for adequate stent deployment was defined as a ratio of coronary pressure at the stent distal edge to the proximal edge (Psd/Psp) that is greater than 0.95. RESULTS: Residual pressure gradient across the stent which was indicated by Psd/Psp≤0.95 was present in 11 (18%), and four of them were caused by insufficient stent expansion (incomplete apposition and asymmetric dilation), and five of them were caused by issues with stent edge (edge dissection and incomplete coverage of the plaques). Insufficient FFR recovery which was recorded at distal part of target vessel was present in 10 (17%), and the main causes corresponded to inadequate stent deployment in half of the lesions, and presence of residual lesion at a non-stent segment in the other half. There were six lesions in whom Psd/Psp was ≤0.95 but FFR was ≥0.80. Disagreement between IVUS and CP-PB findings was seen in 12 (20%). CONCLUSIONS: Residual pressure gradient across the stent can reflect not only an insufficient stent expansion but also issues with stent edges. The decision of optimum stent deployment as assessed by IVUS and CP-PB was mismatched in 20% of cases, therefore careful attention should be paid to decoding the CP-PB findings.
Subject(s)
Blood Pressure/physiology , Coronary Vessels/diagnostic imaging , Coronary Vessels/physiology , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/methods , Stents , Female , Fractional Flow Reserve, Myocardial , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Ultrasonography, InterventionalABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Dural arteriovenous fistulae (DAVF) occasionally lead to cognitive disorders whose reversibility after DAVF treatment remains unclear. We studied changes on pre- and post-treatment magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) scans in ten patients with cognitive disorder due to DAVF. METHODS: We studied the symptoms, pre- and post-treatment MRI scans, SPECT findings, and mini-mental state examination (MMSE) and treatment results in ten patients with cognitive disorder due to DAVF. They were divided into two groups; the post-treatment MMSE score exceeded 25 points in group 1 (n = 6) and was lower than 24 points in group 2 (n = 4). RESULTS: In the six group 1 patients, pretreatment diffusion-weighted images (DWI) showed hyperintense areas, and SPECT scans demonstrated the preservation of vasoreactivity after acetazolamide challenge. In the four group 2 patients, pretreatment SPECT demonstrated hypoperfusion areas that coincided with the hyperintense areas seen on DWI; there were areas with marked disturbance in vasoreactivity. The post-treatment MMSE score in groups 1 and 2 improved by 13.7 +/- 2.4 and 3.8 +/- 1.0 points, respectively; the difference was significant at p < 0.01. CONCLUSION: In patients with cognitive disorder due to DAVF, the preservation of vasoreactivity on SPECT after acetazolamide challenge indicates that their cognitive disorder may be reversible by DAVF treatment.
