Use of Coronary Physiology in the Catheterization Laboratory to Guide Treatment in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease

Coronary Artery Disease

Opinion statement

Fractional flow reserve (FFR) is an invasive pressure–derived index of epicardial stenosis severity used in the catheterization laboratory to assess the hemodynamic significance of coronary lesions when non-invasive functional assessment has either not been performed or is inconclusive. The rationale for the use of FFR is that coronary angiography cannot accurately predict the hemodynamic significance of lesions with diameter stenosis <90% and that there is a large body of literature supporting the use of FFR for directing coronary revascularization. Specifically, in patients with stable angina and low-risk acute coronary syndromes, revascularization with either percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery should be deferred for epicardial coronary stenoses with an FFR > 0.80. Use of FFR to direct coronary revascularization should continue to increase as it has been demonstrated to improve outcomes and reduce cost.

References and Recommended Reading

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. 1.
    Shaw LJ, Iskandrian AE: Prognostic value of gated myocardial perfusion SPECT. J Nucl Cardiol 2004, 11:171–85.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Topol EJ, Ellis SG, Cosgrove DM, et al.: Analysis of coronary angioplasty practice in the United States with an insurance-claims data base. Circulation 1993, 87:1489–97.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lima RS, Watson DD, Goode AR, et al.: Incremental value of combined perfusion and function over perfusion alone by gated SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging for detection of severe three-vessel coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol 2003, 42:64–70.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ragosta M, Bishop AH, Lipson LC, et al.: Comparison between angiography and fractional flow reserve versus single-photon emission computed tomographic myocardial perfusion imaging for determining lesion significance in patients with multivessel coronary disease. Am J Cardiol 2007, 99:896–902.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Pijls NH, Van Gelder B, Van der Voort P, et al.: Fractional flow reserve. A useful index to evaluate the influence of an epicardial coronary stenosis on myocardial blood flow. Circulation 1995, 92:3183–93.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    De Bruyne B, Baudhuin T, Melin JA, et al.: Coronary flow reserve calculated from pressure measurements in humans. Validation with positron emission tomography. Circulation 1994, 89:1013–22.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pijls NH, De Bruyne B, Peels K, et al.: Measurement of fractional flow reserve to assess the functional severity of coronary-artery stenoses. N Engl J Med 1996, 334:1703–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    De Bruyne B, Sarma J: Fractional flow reserve: a review: invasive imaging. Heart 2008, 94:949–59.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    de Bruyne B, Bartunek J, Sys SU, Pijls NH, Heyndrickx GR, Wijns W: Simultaneous coronary pressure and flow velocity measurements in humans. Feasibility, reproducibility, and hemodynamic dependence of coronary flow velocity reserve, hyperemic flow versus pressure slope index, and fractional flow reserve. Circulation 1996, 94:1842–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hamilos M, Peace A, Kochiadakis G, et al. Fractional flow reserve: an indispensable diagnostic tool in the cardiac catheterisation laboratory. Hellenic J Cardiol;51:133–41.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kern MJ, Samady H. Current concepts of integrated coronary physiology in the catheterization laboratory. J Am Coll Cardiol;55:173–85.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Spaan JA, Piek JJ, Hoffman JI, Siebes M: Physiological basis of clinically used coronary hemodynamic indices. Circulation 2006, 113:446–55.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.••
    Tonino PA, Fearon WF, De Bruyne B, et al. Angiographic versus functional severity of coronary artery stenoses in the FAME study fractional flow reserve versus angiography in multivessel evaluation. J Am Coll Cardiol;55:2816–21. This study illustrates the poor diagnostic accuracy of coronary angiography in the detection of ischemia-producing stenoses.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Fearon WF, Tonino PA, De Bruyne B, Siebert U, Pijls NH: Rationale and design of the Fractional Flow Reserve versus Angiography for Multivessel Evaluation (FAME) study. Am Heart J 2007, 154:632–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Applegate RJ. Fractional flow reserve-guided stent therapy for multivessel disease: taking a closer look. J Am Coll Cardiol;55:2822–4.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Pijls NH, van Schaardenburgh P, Manoharan G, et al.: Percutaneous coronary intervention of functionally nonsignificant stenosis: 5-year follow-up of the DEFER Study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007, 49:2105–11.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Nam CW, Yoon HJ, Cho YK, et al. Outcomes of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Intermediate Coronary Artery Disease Fractional Flow Reserve-Guided Versus Intravascular Ultrasound-Guided. JACC Cardiovasc Interv;3:812–817.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hodgson JM. If you want to stent ... Do intravascular ultrasound! JACC Cardiovasc Interv;3:818–20.Google Scholar
  19. 19.••
    Tonino PA, De Bruyne B, Pijls NH, et al.: Fractional flow reserve versus angiography for guiding percutaneous coronary intervention. N Engl J Med 2009, 360:213–24.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.••
    Pijls NH, Fearon WF, Tonino PA, et al. Fractional flow reserve versus angiography for guiding percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease: 2-year follow-up of the FAME (Fractional Flow Reserve Versus Angiography for Multivessel Evaluation) study. J Am Coll Cardiol;56:177–84. This article illustrates the improved outcomes with an FFR-guided strategy compared to an angiographic-guided strategy.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kushner FG, Hand M, Smith Jr SC, et al.: 2009 Focused Updates: ACC/AHA Guidelines for the Management of Patients With ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (updating the 2004 Guideline and 2007 Focused Update) and ACC/AHA/SCAI Guidelines on Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (updating the 2005 Guideline and 2007 Focused Update): a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. Circulation 2009, 120:2271–306.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Korn HV, Yu J, Ohlow MA, et al.: Interventional therapy of bifurcation lesions: a TIMI flow-guided concept to treat side branches in bifurcation lesions–a prospective randomized clinical study (Thueringer bifurcation study, THUEBIS study as pilot trial). Circ Cardiovasc Interv 2009, 2:535–42.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Koo BK, Park KW, Kang HJ, et al.: Physiological evaluation of the provisional side-branch intervention strategy for bifurcation lesions using fractional flow reserve. Eur Heart J 2008, 29:726–32.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hamilos M, Muller O, Cuisset T, et al.: Long-term clinical outcome after fractional flow reserve-guided treatment in patients with angiographically equivocal left main coronary artery stenosis. Circulation 2009, 120:1505–12.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Courtis J, Rodes-Cabau J, Larose E, et al.: Usefulness of coronary fractional flow reserve measurements in guiding clinical decisions in intermediate or equivocal left main coronary stenoses. Am J Cardiol 2009, 103:943–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lindstaedt M, Yazar A, Germing A, et al.: Clinical outcome in patients with intermediate or equivocal left main coronary artery disease after deferral of surgical revascularization on the basis of fractional flow reserve measurements. Am Heart J 2006, 152:156 e1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    De Bruyne B, Pijls NH, Bartunek J, et al.: Fractional flow reserve in patients with prior myocardial infarction. Circulation 2001, 104:157–62.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Samady H, Lepper W, Powers ER, et al.: Fractional flow reserve of infarct-related arteries identifies reversible defects on noninvasive myocardial perfusion imaging early after myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006, 47:2187–93.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ntalianis A. Fractional Flow Reserve for the Assessment of Non-Culprit Coronary Artery Stenoses in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2010.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Ntalianis A, Trana C, Muller O, et al. Effective Radiation Dose, Time, and Contrast Medium to Measure Fractional Flow Reserve. JACC Cardiovasc Interv;3:821–827.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of MedicineEmory University School of MedicineAtlantaUSA

Personalised recommendations