Key result
Invasive coronary physiology assessment enhances angiography for diagnosing epicardial and microvascular CAD.
Why the study?
Coronary physiological measurements have transformed CAD treatment and microvascular assessment enables discernment of angina aetiology without obstructive CAD, warranting examination of pressure wire indices, their clinical impact, and future directions.
Coronary physiological assessments, including hyperemic, non-hyperemic, and non-invasive indices, provide crucial diagnostic and prognostic value for epicardial and microvascular coronary artery disease, though they remain underutilized in contemporary practice.
May support tailored CAD therapy; leaves open need for prospective outcome trials on microvascular indices.
Coronary physiological measurements have transformed the treatment of coronary artery disease (CAD), with increasing evidence supporting the use of pressure wire guided revascularisation. Advances in microvascular assessment have enabled clinicians to discern angina aetiology even in patients without obstructive epicardial coronary artery disease, paving the way for more effective tailored therapy. In this article, the authors will examine pressure wire indices, their role in influencing clinical outcomes and future directions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Alisiddiq et al. (2023) conducted a review in Coronary artery disease and microvascular disease. Coronary physiological measurements (FFR, iFR, CFR, IMR) vs. Angiography-guided assessment was evaluated. Invasive coronary physiology assessment, including FFR and microvascular indices, is a valuable adjunct to coronary angiography for diagnosing epicardial and microvascular coronary artery disease.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: