Key result
Various invasive and non-invasive methods for coronary reserve measurement, including FFR, CFR, and iFR, provide essential functional assessment of coronary stenoses before myocardial revascularization.
Why the study?
Functional assessment of stenoses has been established to guide myocardial revascularization, prompting a review of modern invasive coronary reserve measurement methods.
This review provides a comprehensive overview of modern invasive methods for assessing the functional significance of coronary stenoses, emphasizing the shift from visual estimation to physiological assessment.
During the last years, following numerous trials, the need of functional assessment of stenoses before myocardial revascularization has been established. This came to replace the subjective approach based on the so-called “oculo-stenotic” reflex of the operator. Numerous methods for coronary reserve (CR) estimation as a measure of functional significance of the lesion, have been introduced in the practice. Those methods are noninvasive and invasive. A part of them are based on the measurement of coronary flow velocity before and after hyperemic medication, other are based on the difference of arterial pressure before and after the coronary stenosis. They are divided to such with or without hyperemic medication. During the last years in the diagnostic have been used methods for functional estimation of the lesions based only on standard coronary angiography or even computerized tomography (CT). The aim of this article is to present a review of modern invasive methods for coronary reserve measurement.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Plamen Gatzov (2021) conducted an editorial in Coronary artery disease. Invasive methods for coronary reserve measurement (FFR, CFR, iFR, etc.) was evaluated. Various invasive and non-invasive methods for coronary reserve measurement, including FFR, CFR, and iFR, provide essential functional assessment of coronary stenoses before myocardial revascularization.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: