Publications by authors named "Michael Finizio"

2 Publications

  • Page 1 of 1

Comparison of angiographic and intravascular ultrasound vessel measurements in infra-popliteal endovascular interventions: The below-the-knee calibration study.

Cardiovasc Revasc Med 2021 Sep 16. Epub 2021 Sep 16.

Cardiology, NC Heart and Vascular Research, LLC, UNC School of Medicine, Raleigh, NC, USA. Electronic address:

Background: Endovascular revascularization (ER) via percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) and stenting are viable options for revascularization in below-the-knee (BTK) peripheral arterial disease. Two-dimensional angiography has been the standard of practice for estimating vessel size and selecting treatment devices during ER. However, in other vascular territories, intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) offers better visualization of the lumen dimensions.

Purpose: To compare angiographic and intravascular ultrasound reference vessel (lumen) measurements in below-the-knee peripheral artery interventions.

Methods: 20 consecutive patients were enrolled in the BTK Calibration study from 2 sites in the United States and Australia. Patients with at least one diseased segment in a native infra-popliteal artery (below-the-knee) and a clinical indication for endovascular therapy (EVT) were included with no limitations with regards to vessel diameter or lesion length. Digital subtraction angiography and intravascular ultrasound imaging were collected pre-and post-percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and images were sent to an independent Core lab for standardized quantitative analysis of the normal-looking reference vessel dimensions when available. The results were presented as least square means with 95% confidence intervals and a p-value of <0.05 was considered as significant.

Results: The overall (N = 19) mean reference vessel diameter for QVA was 2.98 ± 1.24 vs. 3.47 ± 0.72 for IVUS (mean difference was -0.50, (95% CI: -0.80, -0.20; p = 0.14). As expected in the proximal segments (N = 12), the mean reference vessel diameters were larger: for QVA was 3.17 ± 1.34 vs. 3.55 ± 0.76 in IVUS, (mean difference was -0.38, (95% CI:-0.79,0.03; p = 0.40); while in the distal segments (N = 7), mean reference vessel diameters were smaller: for QVA was 2.64 ± 1.06 vs. 3.33 ± 0.67 in IVUS, (mean difference was -0.69, (95% CI:-1.04,-0.34; p = 0.17). We observed a greater degree of acute gain in cases where the treatment balloon size correlated with the IVUS measured reference size.

Conclusion: Angiography underestimates infrapopliteal reference vessel lumen size even when quantitatively assessed. Adjunctive IVUS imaging use in guiding BTK procedures could help ensure adequate sizing and possibly impact immediate post-procedure indices.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source Listing
September 2021

Comparison of Quantitative Flow Ratio and Invasive Physiology Indices in a Diverse Population at a Tertiary United States Hospital.

Cardiovasc Revasc Med 2021 11 25;32:1-4. Epub 2021 Jun 25.

Interventional Cardiology, MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, DC, USA. Electronic address:

Background: Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) is a technology to evaluate the coronary stenosis significance on 3-dimensional quantitative coronary angiography. The aim of this study is to evaluate and compare the QFR versus fractional flow reserve (FFR) and/or instantaneous free-wave ratio (iFR) in a US population with a fair African American population representation.

Methods And Results: This was a retrospective, observational and single-center study that enrolled 100 patients who underwent coronary angiography. The diagnostic performance of QFR in terms of sensitivity was 0.80 (95%CI 0.64-0.97) and specificity was 0.95 (95% CI 0.90-1.00), the positive predictive value (PPV) was 0.83 (0.68-0.98), while the negative predictive value (NPV) was 0.94 (0.88-0.99). The overall accuracy was 0.91 and area under the curve (AUC) was 0.92 (95% CI 0.87-0.97). The R-squared was 0.54 and the Bland-Altman plot showed a bias of 0.0016 (SD 0.063) and limits of agreement (LOA): Upper LOA 0.13 and Lower LOA -0.12. In African Americans (n = 33), accuracy, AUC, sensitivity, specificity (94%; 0.90 [0.80-1.00]; 0.90 [0.71-1.00]; 0.96 [0.87-1.00], respectively) were better than those for the overall population.

Conclusions: In a US-based representative population, vessel QFR accuracy and agreement with FFR as reference is high. Diagnostic performance of QFR in African Americans is also excellent.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source Listing
November 2021