Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Search in posts
Search in pages
Filter by Categories
Cardiovascular, Case Report
Cardiovascular, Editorial
Cardiovascular, Images in Cardiology
Cardiovascular, Interventional Round
Cardiovascular, Original Article
Cardiovascular, Preface
Cardiovascular, Review Article
Cardiovascular, Student’s Corner
Case Report
Case Reports
Clinical Discussion
Clinical Rounds
CPC
Debate
Dedication
Editorial
Expert Comments
Expert's Opinion
Genetic Autopsy
Genetics Autopsy
Image in Cardiology
Images in Cardiology
Interventional Round
Interventional Rounds
Letter to the Editor
Media and news
Original Article
Practice in Medicine
Preface
Review Article
Scientific Paper
Short Communication
Student's Corner
WINCARS Activities
Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Search in posts
Search in pages
Filter by Categories
Cardiovascular, Case Report
Cardiovascular, Editorial
Cardiovascular, Images in Cardiology
Cardiovascular, Interventional Round
Cardiovascular, Original Article
Cardiovascular, Preface
Cardiovascular, Review Article
Cardiovascular, Student’s Corner
Case Report
Case Reports
Clinical Discussion
Clinical Rounds
CPC
Debate
Dedication
Editorial
Expert Comments
Expert's Opinion
Genetic Autopsy
Genetics Autopsy
Image in Cardiology
Images in Cardiology
Interventional Round
Interventional Rounds
Letter to the Editor
Media and news
Original Article
Practice in Medicine
Preface
Review Article
Scientific Paper
Short Communication
Student's Corner
WINCARS Activities
View/Download PDF

Translate this page into:

Editorial
04 (
04
); 177-178
doi:
10.1055/s-0039-3402590

FFR—Is It Reliable and Sufficient Tool in Stable Patients?

Department of Cardiology, Nizam’s Institute of Medical Sciences (NIMS), Hyderabad, India
Address for correspondence Jeethender Kumar Kala, MD Department of Cardiology, Nizam’s Institute of Medical Sciences (NIMS) Hyderabad, Telangana 500 082 India jeetu_jain24@yahoo.com
Licence
This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Disclaimer:
This article was originally published by Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Private Ltd. and was migrated to Scientific Scholar after the change of Publisher; therefore Scientific Scholar has no control over the quality or content of this article.

Fractional flow reserve (FFR) is a tool for assessment of significance of intermediate coronary lesions.1 2 3 It is useful not only in the single coronary lesion, but also in the multivessel disease (MVD).4 When angiographically tighter triple vessel disease (TVD) is seen, then the decision may be taken for coronary bypass surgery depending on the anatomical severity. In fact, if functional assessment is done with FFR, then true TVD or not can be known, which may change the revascularization modality of treatment.

The three important randomized controlled trails on FFR (FAME-2,5 DANAMI-3-PRIMULTI,6 and COMPARE-ACUTE7), where deferred revascularization depending on the FFR value, showed that it was safer, even though the last two trials were done in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients. On contrary, this present study8 shows that the incidence of target lesion failure in intermediate stenosis with deferred revascularization (FFR > 0.8) was high (5.8%).

Shabbir et al,8 in their study, suggested that predicting 1-year rates of deferred lesion intervention (DLI) based on simple characteristics available at the time of index FFR measurement was presence of diabetes mellitus, left ventricular dysfunction, and ACS presentation. But this proposition is also controversial. If patients categorized as high risk for DLI and who have an FFR of 0.8 to 0.85 will have better clinical outcomes with intervention at the time of index cardiac catheterization is still unknown, and the use of this risk model in conjunction with FFR may lead to improved patient outcomes.9

There are multiple limitations to the study.

First, it is a descriptive observational study where 102 patients with 104 lesions are treated. Randomized design with large cohorts is required to validate the findings.

Second, the site of the intermediate stenosis is not taken into account. In one study, “Significance of intermediate values of FFR in patients with CAD,”10 the authors concluded that in intermediate stenosis with FFR in and around the gray zone “bears a major prognostic impact, especially in proximal lesions of left anterior descending artery (LAD). In this regard, deferring revascularization in proximal LAD, especially the gray zone FFR, is not appropriate, where clinical decision and additional physiological indices need to be considered.

Third, only chronic stable angina patients are included in contrary to a real-world scenario where ACS patients are major challenging to treat.

Fourth, single vessel disease is taken, and MVD is excluded where the estimation of FFR is challenging.

DEFINE-FLAIR and iFR-SWEDEHEART trials showed the importance of other modalities of physiological assessment of coronary lesion, that is, instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR). According to these authors, iFR is noninferior to FFR in predicting the clinical outcomes (especially for the ischemia-driven revascularization).11 12 Recently, multiple coronary diastolic phase indices are introduced which requires validation.

Conflict of Interest

None declared.

References

  1. , . Percutaneous coronary intervention should be guided by fractional flow reserve measurement. Circulation. 2014;129(18):1860-1870.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. , , , et al . Percutaneous coronary intervention of functionally nonsignificant stenosis: 5-year follow-up of the DEFER Study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;49(21):2105-2111.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. , , , et al . Fractional flow reserve to determine the appropriateness of angioplasty in moderate coronary stenosis: a randomized trial. Circulation. 2001;103(24):2928-2934.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. , , , et al . Comparison between angiography and fractional flow reserve versus single-photon emission computed tomographic myocardial perfusion imaging for determining lesion significance in patients with multivessel coronary disease. Am J Cardiol. 2007;99(07):896-902.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. , , , et al . FAME 2 Trial Investigators. Fractional flow reserve-guided PCI versus medical therapy in stable coronary disease. N Engl J Med. 2012;367(11):991-1001.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. , , , et al , . Complete revascularisation versus treatment of the culprit lesion only in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease (DANAMI-3—PRIMULTI): an open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2015;386:665-671. (9994)
    [Google Scholar]
  7. , , , et al , . Fractional flow reserve-guided multivessel angioplasty in myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 2017;376(13):1234-1244.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. , , , , , . Ind J Car Dis Wom. . 2019;4(04):190-194.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. , , , et al . Risk model for estimating the 1-year risk of deferred lesion intervention following deferred revascularization after fractional flow reserve assessment. Eur Heart J. 2015;36(08):509-515.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. , , , et al . Significance of intermediate values of fractional flow reserve in patients with coronary artery disease. Circulation. 2016;133(05):502-508.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. , , , et al . Use of the instantaneous wave-free ratio or fractional flow reserve in PCI. N Engl J Med. 2017;376(19):1824-1834.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. , , , et al . iFR-SWEDEHEART Investigators. Instantaneous wave-free ratio versus fractional flow reserve to guide PCI. N Engl J Med. 2017;376(19):1813-1823.
    [Google Scholar]

Fulltext Views
6

PDF downloads
0
View/Download PDF
Download Citations
BibTeX
RIS
Show Sections