Key result
Fractional flow reserve and non-hyperemic pressure ratios are essential tools for guiding percutaneous coronary interventions, improving clinical outcomes by deferring unnecessary procedures.
Physiology-guided percutaneous coronary intervention using FFR or non-hyperemic indices is a cornerstone of modern practice, supported by guidelines to optimize revascularization strategies.
Hemodynamical evaluation of a coronary artery lesion is an important diagnostic step to assess its functional impact. Fractional flow reserve (FFR) received a class IA recommendation from the European Society of Cardiology for the assessment of angiographically moderate stenosis. FFR evaluation of coronary artery disease offers improvement of the therapeutic strategy, deferring unnecessary procedures for lesions with a FFR > 0.8, improving patients' management and clinical outcome. Post intervention, an optimal FFR > 0.9 post stenting should be reached and > 0.8 post drug eluting balloons. Non-hyperemic pressure ratio measurements have been validated in previous studies with a common threshold of 0.89. They might overestimate the hemodynamic significance of some lesions but remain useful whenever hyperemic agents are contraindicated. FFR remains the gold standard reference for invasive assessment of ischemia. We illustrate this review with two cases introducing the possibility to estimate also non-invasively FFR from reconstructed 3-D angiograms by quantitative flow ratio. We conclude introducing a hybrid approach to intermediate lesions (DFR 0.85-0.95) potentially maximizing clinical decision from all measurements.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Boutaleb et al. (2023) conducted a review in Coronary artery disease. Fractional flow reserve (FFR) and non-hyperemic pressure ratios (NHPR) vs. Angiography-guided PCI was evaluated. Fractional flow reserve and non-hyperemic pressure ratios are essential tools for guiding percutaneous coronary interventions, improving clinical outcomes by deferring unnecessary procedures.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: