Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Dec;13(12):2576-2587.
doi: 10.1016/j.jcmg.2020.07.008. Epub 2020 Aug 26.

Sex Differences in Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography-Derived Fractional Flow Reserve: Lessons From ADVANCE

Timothy A Fairbairn  1 , Rebecca Dobson  2 , Lyne Hurwitz-Koweek  3 , Hitoshi Matsuo  4 , Bjarne L Norgaard  5 , Niels Peter Rønnow Sand  6 , Koen Nieman  7 , Jeroen J Bax  8 , Gianluca Pontone  9 , Gilbert Raff  10 , Kavitha M Chinnaiyan  10 , Mark Rabbat  11 , Tetsuya Amano  12 , Tomohiro Kawasaki  13 , Takashi Akasaka  14 , Hironori Kitabata  12 , Sukumaran Binukrishnan  2 , Campbell Rogers  15 , Daniel Berman  16 , Manesh R Patel  3 , Pamela S Douglas  3 , Jonathon Leipsic  17
Affiliations
Free article

Sex Differences in Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography-Derived Fractional Flow Reserve: Lessons From ADVANCE

Timothy A Fairbairn et al. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2020 Dec.
Free article

Abstract

Objectives: This study is to determine the management and clinical outcomes of patients investigated with coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA)-derived fractional flow reserve (FFRCT) according to sex.

Background: Women are underdiagnosed with conventional ischemia testing, have lower rates of obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) at invasive coronary angiography (ICA), yet higher mortality compared to men. Whether FFRCT improves sex-based patient management decisions compared to CCTA alone is unknown.

Methods: Subjects with symptoms and CAD on CCTA were enrolled (2015 to 2017). Demographics, symptom status, CCTA anatomy, coronary volume to myocardial mass ratio (V/M), lowest FFRCT values, and management plans were captured. Endpoints included reclassification rate between CCTA and FFRCT management plans, incidence of ICA demonstrating obstructive CAD (≥50% stenosis) and revascularization rates.

Results: A total of 4,737 patients (n = 1,603 females, 33.8%) underwent CCTA and FFRCT. Women were older (age 68 ± 10 years vs. 65 ± 10 years; p < 0.0001) with more atypical symptoms (41.5% vs. 33.9%; p < 0.0001). Women had less obstructive CAD (65.4% vs. 74.7%; p < 0.0001) at CCTA, higher FFRCT (0.76 ± 0.10 vs. 0.73 ± 0.10; p < 0.0001), and lower likelihood of positive FFRCT ≤ 0.80 for the same degree stenosis (p < 0.0001). A positive FFRCT ≤0.80 resulted in equal referral to ICA (n = 510 [54.5%] vs. n = 1,249 [56.5%]; p = 0.31), but more nonobstructive CAD (n = 208 [32.1%] vs. n = 354 [24.5%]; p = 0.0003) and less revascularization (n = 294 [31.4%] vs. n = 800 [36.2%]; p < 0.0001) in women, unless the FFRCT was ≤0.75 where revascularization rates were similar (n = 253 [41.9%] vs. n = 715 [46.4%]; p = 0.06). Women have a higher V/M ratio (26.17 ± 7.58 mm3/g vs. 24.76 ± 7.22 mm3/g; p < 0.0001) that is associated with higher FFRCT independent of degree stenosis (p < 0.001). Predictors of revascularization included stenosis severity, FFRCT, symptoms, and V/M ratio (p < 0.001) but not female sex (p = 0.284).

Conclusions: FFRCT differs between the sexes, as women have a higher FFRCT for the same degree of stenosis. In FFRCT-positive CAD, women have less obstructive CAD at ICA and less revascularization, which is associated with higher V/M ratio. The findings suggest that CAD and FFRCT variations by sex need specific interpretation as these differences may affect therapeutic decision making and clinical outcomes. (Assessing Diagnostic Value of Non-invasive FFRCT in Coronary Care [ADVANCE]; NCT02499679).

Keywords: coronary computed tomography angiography; coronary volume/mass; fractional flow reserve derived from computed tomography; sex.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Author Disclosures This study was supported by HeartFlow, Inc., Redwood City, California, via individual Clinical Study Agreements with each enrolling institution and with the Duke Clinical Research Institute (DCRI) for Core Laboratory activities and Clinical Event Committee adjudication of adverse events. Dr. Fairbairn is on the Speakers Bureau for Heartflow. Dr. Hurwitz-Koweek is on the Speakers Bureau for Heartflow; and has unrestricted grant funding from Siemens and Heartflow. Dr. Nørgaard has received unrestricted institutional research grants from Siemens and HeartFlow. Dr. Nieman has received unrestricted institutional research grants from Siemens, Bayer, GE, and HeartFlow. Dr. Bax has received unrestricted research grants from Edwards Lifescience, Medtronic, Boston Scientific, Biotronik, and GE Healthcare; and is on the Speakers Bureau with Abbott. Dr. Pontone is a consultant for GE Healthcare; and has research grants from GE Healthcare and Heartflow. Dr. Raff has received institutional grants from HeartFlow. Dr. Chinnaiyan has received institutional grants from HeartFlow. Dr. Rabbat has received institutional grants from HeartFlow. Dr. Binukrishnan is on the Speakers Bureau for Heartflow. Dr. Rogers is an employee of and has equity in Heartflow. Dr. Berman has received unrestricted research support from Heartflow. Dr. Patel has received grants from HeartFlow, Jansen, Bayer, AstraZeneca, and NHLBI; and has served as a consultant for Jansen, Bayer, AstraZeneca, Genzyme, and Merck. Dr. Douglas has received institutional grants from HeartFlow. Dr. Leipsic is a consultant for and has stock options in Circle CVI and Heartflow. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose.

Comment in

Publication types

Associated data