Fractional flow reserve computed tomography in the evaluation of coronary artery disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Amongst patients with suspected obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD), less than a third of patients have obstructive disease on invasive coronary angiography (ICA) and fewer still have flow-limiting obstructive disease as determined by invasive fractional flow reserve (FFR). FFR is a powerful tool in guiding revascularization of flow-limiting lesions which in turn improves clinical outcome in those with haemodynamically significant obstructive disease. However FFR is infrequently performed due to the cost, time and patient discomfort the procedure entails. Further advances in non-invasive imaging has allowed FFR to be derived non-invasively by applying computational fluid dynamic (CFD) modeling to the coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) dataset without the need to induce hyperemia or modify the standard CCTA acquisition protocol. FFR derived from CCTA has been shown to have excellent correlation with invasive FFR and remains diagnostically robust in presence of reduced signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), coronary calcification and motion artifact. More recently, new data have emerged evaluating the clinical impact of fractional flow reserve computed tomography (FFRCT) on the assessment and management of patients with stable chest pain. One such study is the Prospective LongitudinAl trial of FFRCT: Outcome and Resource IMpacts (PLATFORM) study which showed an improved patient selection for ICA using CCTA-FFRCT approach by increasing the likelihood of identifying obstructive CAD at ICA amongst those intended for invasive testing. CCTA-FFRCT may therefore serve as efficacious gatekeeper to ICA that enriches the ICA population. The utility of FFRCT has also helped deepened our understanding of CAD. Through CFD modeling, it is now recognized that there are mechanistic forces of wall shear stress (WSS) and axial plaque force acting on coronary plaques. This has created further interest in exploring the possible interplay between these mechanistic forces on the development of coronary plaque and vulnerability of these plaques to rupture.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".