Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Design
Review
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This review highlights the technical requirements, limitations, and common pitfalls of FFR and iFR measurements to improve accuracy in clinical practice.
BACKGROUND: The only indication for coronary revascularization is elimination of ischaemia. Invasive hemodynamic methods (fractional flow reserve - FFR and instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) are superior to coronary angiography in detection of lesions causing myocardial ischaemia. Current European guidelines for myocardial revascularization recommend using of FFR for detection of functional assessment of lesions severity in category IA and number of these procedures increases. However, routine usage of these methods requires knowledge of technical requirements and limitations. AIM: The aim of the study is to summarise good clinical practice for FFR and iFR measurements with explanation of possible technical challenges, that are necessary for increasing of measurement accuracy. CONCLUSIONS: Authors describe frequent technical mistakes and malpractice during invasive assessment of lesion severity in coronary arteries.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jeřábek et al. (2018) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: