Fractional flow reserve: a clinical perspective.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Corcoran D
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5489582 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Jul
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Fractional flow reserve: a clinical perspective.
Corcoran David D Hennigan Barry B Berry Colin C
The international journal of cardiovascular imaging 20170602 7
Fractional flow reserve (FFR) is a reference invasive diagnostic test to assess the physiological significance of an epicardial coronary artery stenosis. FFR-guided percutaneous coronary intervention in stable coronary artery disease has been assessed in three seminal clinical trials and the indications for FFR assessment are expanding into other clinical scenarios. In this article we review the theoretical, experimental and clinical basis for FFR measurement. We place FFR measurement in the con ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Physiologically driven coronary revascularization has been shown to be superior in terms of better outcomes and optimum resource utilization for percutaneous interventions. However, its applicability to surgical myocardial revascularization lacks evidence base. GRAFITTI Trial aims at bridging this gap and Dr. F Casselman discusses its rationale and design.
| S-EPMC7525716 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) is a novel method to assess the ischemic potential of coronary artery stenoses. Clinical trial data have shown that iFR has acceptable diagnostic agreement with fractional flow reserve (FFR), the reference standard for the functional assessment of coronary stenoses. This study compares iFR measurements with FFR measurements in a real world, single-center setting.Methods and resultsInstantaneous wave-free ratio and FFR were measured in 50 coronary artery lesions in 42 patients, with FFR ≤ 0.8 classified as functionally significant. An iFR-only technique, using a treatment cut-off value, iFR ≤ 0.89, provided a classification agreement of 84% with FFR ≤ 0.80. Use of a hybrid iFR-FFR technique, incorporating FFR measurement for lesions within the iFR gray zone of 0.86-0.93, would improve classification agreement with FFR to 94%, with diagnosis achieved without the need for hyperemia in 57% patients.ConclusionThis study in a real-world setting demonstrated good classification agreement between iFR and FFR. Use of a hybrid iFR-FFR technique would achieve high diagnostic accuracy while minimizing adenosine use, compared with routine FFR.
| S-EPMC5447668 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVES:To compare fractional flow reserve (FFR) and instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) measurements in an all-comer patient population with moderate coronary artery stenoses. BACKGROUND:Visual assessment of the severity of coronary artery stenoses is often discordant in moderate lesions. FFR allows reliable functional severity assessment in these cases but requires adenosine-induced hyperaemia with associated additional time, costs and side effects. The iFR is a hyperaemia-independent index. METHODS AND RESULTS:Between November 2015 and February 2017, 356 consecutive patients were included in whom 515 coronary stenoses were measured using both iFR and FFR. Mean iFR and FFR were 0.90?±?0.09 and 0.86?±?0.08, respectively. iFR correlated well with FFR [r?=?0.75; p?<?0.001]. Receiver operating characteristic analysis identified an area under the curve of 0.92. An iFR-only strategy with a treatment cut-off ?0.89 revealed a diagnostic classification agreement with the FFR-only strategy in 420 lesions (82%) with a sensitivity of 87%, a specificity of 80%, a positive predictive value of 56% and a negative predictive value of 96%. CONCLUSIONS:Real-time iFR measurements have good negative predictive value compared to FFR, but moderate diagnostic accuracy (82%). It exposes fewer patients to adenosine, reduces procedure time and costs. Further prospective trials are needed to evaluate specific clinical settings, cut-off values and endpoints.
| S-EPMC6046658 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The aim of this review was to discuss the current practice and patient selection for invasive FFR, new techniques to estimate invasive FFR and future of coronary physiology tests. We elaborate on the indication and application of FFR and on the contraindications and concerns in certain patient populations.
| S-EPMC8684425 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeTo examine the prognostic implication of fractional flow reserve (FFR) derived from coronary CT (FFRCT) in routine clinical practice.Materials and methodsPatients referred for FFRCT analysis at a single center between October 2015 and June 2017 were retrospectively included and followed up for rates of invasive angiography and clinical events. Two hundred seven patients underwent successful FFRCT analysis with seven lost to follow-up, leaving 200 (mean age ± standard deviation, 62.4 years ± 10.0; 49 [24.5%] women) patients for analysis. At coronary CT angiography, patients were categorized as having significant stenosis (SS) in the presence of a diameter stenosis greater than or equal to 50% (hereafter, SS positive) and flow limitation in the presence of a postlesion (that is, FFRCT measured 2 cm to the distal aspect of the lesion) FFRCT less than 0.80 (hereafter, FFRCT positive). Vessel-oriented clinical events (VOCEs) were defined as vessel-related late revascularization (>90 days), myocardial infarction, and cardiac mortality.ResultsAt CT angiography, 130 (65%) studies were SS positive and 63 (31.5%) were FFRCT positive. At median follow-up of 477 days (range, 252-859 days), there were 26 VOCE end points in 22 patients: 22 revascularizations and four nonfatal myocardial infarctions. VOCE end points occurred in zero of 58 (0%) of SS-negative and FFRCT negative patients, in eight of 79 (10.1%) of SS-positive and FFRCT-negative patients, in zero of 12 (0%) of SS-negative and FFRCT-positive patients, and in 18 of 51 (35.3%) of SS-positive and FFRCT-positive patients (log-rank χ2 = 30.1; P < .001). At multivariable Cox regression, both FFRCT (hazard ratio per 0.1 decrease, 1.54 [95% confidence interval: 1.1, 2.2] P = .013) and stenosis (hazard ratio per unit increase, 2.16 [95% confidence interval: 1.25, 3.72] P = .006) were independently associated with VOCE.ConclusionStenosis and FFRCT are independent predictors of intermediate-term outcomes. In the absence of a stenosis greater than 50%, a positive FFRCT result is not associated with an increased intermediate risk.© RSNA, 2019Supplemental material is available for this article.See also commentary by Fairbairn and Bull in this issue.
| S-EPMC7970101 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionFractional flow reserve (FFR) is recommended by society guidelines for assessment of the hemodynamic significance of intermediate coronary lesions when non-invasive evidence of myocardial ischemia is unavailable. However, the prevalence of FFR usage in current practice and how FFR values impact revascularization decisions are not well known.MethodsAt a single-center Veterans Administration Hospital, all subjects referred for coronary angiography for any indication from the period from May 2012 until January 2014 were prospectively entered into a database. FFR was measured in all intermediate coronary lesions (30-70% stenosis). Based on the FFR results, the lesions were categorized into 3 different groups: FFR > 0.80 (non-ischemic), FFR 0.75-0.80 (gray zone), and FFR < 0.75 (ischemic).ResultsA total of 1482 cardiac catheterizations were performed during the study period. FFR was performed in 347 (23%) of these procedures. The total numbers of intermediate coronary lesions evaluated with FFR were 429. The mean FFR value was 0.79 (median = 0.80; interquartile range 0.64-0.96). Among 211 non-ischemic lesions, revascularization was deferred in 201 (95%). In the gray-zone group (73 lesions), 35 (48%) lesions were treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), 11 (15%) lesions were referred for coronary artery bypass grafting surgery (CABG), and 27 (37%) lesions were treated medically. In the ischemic group (145 lesions), 82 (57%) lesions were treated with PCI, 41 (28%) lesions were referred for CABG, and 22 (15%) lesions were treated medically.ConclusionAt a Veterans Administration Hospital, FFR was performed in approximately one out of four total catheterizations. FFR documented lack of ischemia in about half of the intermediate coronary lesions, and thus reduced the need for many revascularization procedures.
| S-EPMC4675752 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Computed Tomography derived Fractional Flow Reserve (CTFFR) is an emerging non-invasive imaging modality to assess functional significance of coronary stenosis. We performed a meta-analysis to compare the diagnostic performance of CTFFR to invasive Fractional Flow reserve (FFR). Electronic search was performed to identify relevant articles. Pooled Estimates of sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (LR+), negative likelihood ratio (LR-) and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated at the patient level as well as the individual vessel level using hierarchical logistic regression, summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve and area under the curve were estimated. Our search yielded 559 articles and of these 17 studies was included in the analysis. A total of 2,191 vessels in 1294 patients were analyzed. Pooled estimates of sensitivity, specificity, LR+, LR- and DOR with corresponding 95% CI at per-patient level were 83% (79-87), 72% (68-76), 3.0 (2.6-3.5), 0.23 (0.18-0.29) and 13 (9-18) respectively. Pooled estimates of sensitivity, specificity, LR+, LR- and DOR with corresponding 95% CI at per-vessel level were 85% (83-88), 76% (74-79), 3.6 (3.3-4.0), 0.19 (0.16-0.22) and 19 (15-24). The area under the SROC curve was 0.89 for both per patient level and at the per vessel level. In our meta-analysis, CTFFR demonstrated good diagnostic performance in identifying functionally significant coronary artery stenosis compared to the FFR.
| S-EPMC6070545 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Data are limited regarding outcomes of deferred lesions in patients with angiographically insignificant stenosis but low fractional flow reserve (FFR). We investigated the natural history of angiographically insignificant stenosis with low FFR among patients who underwent routine 3-vessel FFR measurement. METHODS AND RESULTS:From December 2011 to March 2014, 1136 patients with 3298 vessels underwent routine 3-vessel FFR measurement (3V FFR-FRIENDS study, ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01621438), and this study analyzed the 2-year clinical outcomes of 1024 patients with 2124 lesions with angiographically insignificant stenosis (percentage of diameter stenosis <50%), in which revascularization was deferred. All lesions were classified according to FFR values, using a cutoff of 0.80 (high FFR >0.80 versus low FFR ?0.80). The primary end point was outcome of major adverse cardiovascular events (a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and ischemia-driven revascularization) at 2 years. Mean angiographic percentage of diameter stenosis and FFR of total lesions were 32.5±10.3% and 0.91±0.08%, respectively. Among the total lesions with angiographically insignificant stenosis, 8.7% showed low FFR (185 lesions). The incidence of lesions with low FFR was 2.5%, 3.8%, 9.0%, and 15.1% in categories of percentage of diameter stenosis <20%, 20% to 30%, 30% to 40%, and 40% to 50%, respectively. At 2-year follow-up, the low-FFR group showed a significantly higher risk of major adverse cardiovascular events compared with the high FFR group (3.3% versus 1.2%, hazard ratio: 3.371; 95% CI, 1.346-8.442; P=0.009). In multivariable analysis, low FFR was the most powerful independent predictor of future MACE in deferred lesions with angiographically insignificant stenosis (adjusted hazard ratio: 2.617; 95% CI, 1.026-6.679; P=0.044). CONCLUSIONS:In deferred angiographically insignificant stenosis, lesions with low FFR showed significantly higher event rates than those with high FFR. FFR was an independent predictor of future major adverse cardiovascular events in lesions with angiographically insignificant stenosis. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION:URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01621438.
| S-EPMC5586447 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Sex-specific differences affect the evaluation, treatment, and prognosis of coronary artery disease. We tested the hypothesis that long-term outcomes of fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are different between women and men.Consecutive 1090 patients, referred for PCI and undergoing FFR measurements at the Mayo Clinic between October 2002 and December 2009, were included in this registry study. Clinical events were compared between the sexes during a median follow-up of 50.9 months. Of all patients, women had higher FFR adjusted by visual coronary stenosis than men (P=0.03). The Kaplan-Meier percent of major adverse cardiac events at 5 years was 35% in women and 38% in men (P=0.54). Interestingly, in patients undergoing PCI with an FFR <0.75, the incidence of death or myocardial infarction was significantly higher in women than in men (hazard ratio, 2.16; 95% confidence interval, 1.04-4.51; P=0.04). Moreover, compared with patients with FFR >0.80, deferral of PCI for those with FFR between 0.75 and 0.80 was associated with an increased rate of major adverse cardiac events, particularly death or myocardial infarction in women (hazard ratio, 3.25; 95% confidence interval, 1.56-6.74; P=0.002) and revascularization in men (hazard ratio, 2.66; 95% confidence interval, 1.66-4.54; P<0.001).Long-term outcome differs between women and men undergoing FFR-guided PCI. Our data suggest that the sex-based treatment strategy is necessary to further optimize prognosis of patients with coronary artery disease.
| S-EPMC3904351 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objective proof of focal lesions is mandatory, and the best invasive method of physiological testing is fractional flow r eserve (FFR). The increased trans-stenotic gradient is measured via the guiding catheter and pressure transducer on a 0.014" coronary wire at maximal hyperaemia induced by adenosine. Patients with a FFR of less than 0.8 should undergo myocardial revascularisation by percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass graft, particularly if the proximal and middle segments of the main coronary arteries and large side-branches are affected; there is no prognostic revascularisation benefit in patients with moderate stenoses and FFR greater than 0.80. FFR assessment of coronary lesions is superior to other invasive morphological studies, such as intracoronary ultrasound or optical coherence tomography. Its use in non-culprit vessels in acute coronary syndromes is currently under scrutiny. Recent advances in computed tomographic technique allow non-invasive assessment of FFR, but clinical validation has yet to be obtained.
| S-EPMC6159406 | biostudies-other