Key result
Invasive physiology with FFR and iFR accurately determines left main coronary lesion significance.
Why the study?
Underestimating left main lesion significance risks inappropriately deferring revascularization, whereas overestimation may trigger unnecessary major interventions.
Invasive physiological assessment with FFR and iFR provides essential functional evaluation of left main coronary lesions to prevent inappropriate deferral or unnecessary revascularization.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Supports FFR/iFR for left main assessment in equivocal cases; leaves open need for dedicated RCTs before routine adoption.
It is of critical importance to correctly assess the significance of a left main lesion. Underestimation of significance beholds the risk of inappropriate deferral of revascularization, whereas overestimation may trigger major but unnecessary interventions. This article addresses the invasive physiological assessment of left main disease and its role in deciding upon revascularization. It mainly focuses on the available evidence for fractional flow reserve and instantaneous wave-free ratio, their interpretation, and limitations. We also discuss alternative invasive physiological indices and imaging, as well as the link between physiology, ischemia, and prognosis.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kayaert et al. (2021) conducted a review in Left Main Coronary Artery Disease. Invasive physiological assessment (FFR and iFR) vs. Visual angiographic assessment was evaluated. Invasive physiological assessment using fractional flow reserve and instantaneous wave-free ratio is critical for accurately determining the significance of left main coronary artery lesions.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: