Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Role of Fractional-Flow Reserve in Guiding Percutaneous Revascularization in Stable Coronary Artery Disease

  • Clinical Trials and Their Interpretations (J Kizer, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Atherosclerosis Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Optimal medical therapy unarguably forms the cornerstone of management for patients with stable coronary artery disease. There is, however, a significant body of evidence suggesting that reduction of ischemia can be achieved more effectively with revascularization than medical therapy and can confer significant symptomatic and prognostic advantages. Nonetheless, owing to limitations of coronary angiography and conventional non-invasive functional testing for myocardial ischemia, targeting of hemodynamically significant coronary stenoses for revascularization is often difficult. We discuss the role of invasive fractional-flow reserve evaluation in guiding percutaneous revascularization procedures for patients with stable coronary artery disease and its potential impact on outcomes for these patients.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

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

  1. GBD Mortality Causes of Death Collaborators. Global, regional, and national age-sex specific all-cause and cause-specific mortality for 240 causes of death, 1990-2013: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013. Lancet. 2015;385(9963):117–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Writing committee to develop Guidelines for Management of Patients With Ventricular Arrhythmias and the Prevention of Sudden Cardiac Death: ACC/AHA/ESC 2006 Guidelines for Management of Patients With Ventricular Arrhythmias and the Prevention of Sudden Cardiac Death: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force and the European Society of Cardiology Committee for Practice Guidelines Circulation 2006;114(10):e385-484.

  3. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey: 2011 Emergency Department Summary Tables. In. Edited by Ambulatory and Hospital Care Statistics Branch; 2015.

  4. Spertus JA, Salisbury AC, Jones PG, Conaway DG, Thompson RC. Predictors of quality-of-life benefit after percutaneous coronary intervention. Circulation. 2004;110(25):3789–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Task Force on the management of stable coronary artery disease of the European Society of Cardiology. 2013 ESC guidelines on the management of stable coronary artery disease. Eur Heart J. 2013;34(38):2949–3003. Latest European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines on the management of stable coronary artery disease. Notably, FFR is given a class I level A recommendation for the identification of hemodynamically relevant coronary lesions, when evidence of ischemia is not available. A Class I Level B recommendation is also given for revascularization of stenoses with FFR <0.80 in patients with angina symptoms or a positive stress test.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Sarno G, Lagerqvist B, Fröbert O, et al. Lower risk of stent thrombosis and restenosis with unrestricted use of ‘new-generation’ drug-eluting stents: a report from the nationwide Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry (SCAAR); 2012.

  7. Ellis SG, Stone GW, Cox DA, et al. Long-term safety and efficacy with paclitaxel-eluting stents: 5-year final results of the TAXUS IV clinical trial (TAXUS IV-SR: Treatment of De Novo Coronary Disease Using a Single Paclitaxel-Eluting Stent). J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. 2009;2(12):1248–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Amsterdam EA, Wenger NK, Brindis RG, et al. 2014 AHA/ACC guideline for the management of patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes: executive summary: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. Circulation. 2014;130(25):2354–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Levine GN, Bates ER, Blankenship JC, et al. 2011 ACCF/AHA/SCAI Guideline for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines and the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions. Circulation. 2011;124(23):e574–651.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Fihn SD, Blankenship JC, Alexander KP, et al. ACC/AHA/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS focused update of the guideline for the diagnosis and management of patients with stable ischemic heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines, and the American Association for Thoracic Surgery, Preventive Cardiovascular Nurses Association, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Circulation. 2014;130(19):1749–67. Latest American Multisociety 2014 guideline update on the management of stable coronary artery disease. Although newest data, including the FAME-2 study, were considered, the recommendations for FFR utilization were not altered from the 2012 full-text guidelines.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Fihn SD, Gardin JM, Abrams J, et al. 2012 ACCF/AHA/ACP/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart DiseaseA Report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines, and the American College of Physicians, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, Preventive Cardiovascular Nurses Association, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;60(24):e44–e164.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. BARI. 2D Study Group: a randomized trial of therapies for type 2 diabetes and coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med. 2009;360(24):2503–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Weintraub WS, Spertus JA, Kolm P, et al. Effect of PCI on quality of life in patients with stable coronary disease. N Engl J Med. 2008;359(7):677–87.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Boden WE, O'Rourke RA, Teo KK, et al. Optimal medical therapy with or without PCI for stable coronary disease. N Engl J Med. 2007;356(15):1503–16.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Boden WE, O'Rourke RA, Teo KK, et al. Design and rationale of the Clinical Outcomes Utilizing Revascularization and Aggressive DruG Evaluation (COURAGE) trial Veterans Affairs Cooperative Studies Program no. 424. Am Heart J. 2006;151(6):1173–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Kereiakes DJ, Teirstein PS, Sarembock IJ, et al. The truth and consequences of the COURAGE trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;50(16):1598–603.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Kakouros N, Rybicki FJ, Mitsouras D, Miller JM. Coronary pressure-derived fractional flow reserve in the assessment of coronary artery stenoses. Eur Radiol. 2013;23(4):958–67.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Young DF, Cholvin NR, Roth AC. Pressure drop across artificially induced stenoses in the femoral arteries of dogs. Circ Res. 1975;36(6):735–43.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Gould KL. Pressure-flow characteristics of coronary stenoses in unsedated dogs at rest and during coronary vasodilation. Circ Res. 1978;43(2):242–53.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Tu S, Barbato E, Koszegi Z, et al. Fractional flow reserve calculation from 3-dimensional quantitative coronary angiography and TIMI frame count: a fast computer model to quantify the functional significance of moderately obstructed coronary arteries. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. 2014;7(7):768–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 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(1):64–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Chung SY, Lee KY, Chun EJ, et al. Comparison of stress perfusion MRI and SPECT for detection of myocardial ischemia in patients with angiographically proven three-vessel coronary artery disease. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010;195(2):356–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Melikian N, De Bondt P, Tonino P, et al. Fractional flow reserve and myocardial perfusion imaging in patients with angiographic multivessel coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. 2010;3(3):307–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Segar DS, Brown SE, Sawada SG, Ryan T, Feigenbaum H. Dobutamine stress echocardiography: correlation with coronary lesion severity as determined by quantitative angiography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1992;19(6):1197–202.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Herz SL, Hasegawa T, Makaryus AN, et al. Quantitative three-dimensional wall motion analysis predicts ischemic region size and location. Ann Biomed Eng. 2010;38(4):1367–76.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Hachamovitch R, Rozanski A, Hayes SW, et al. Predicting therapeutic benefit from myocardial revascularization procedures: are measurements of both resting left ventricular ejection fraction and stress-induced myocardial ischemia necessary? J Nucl Cardiol. 2006;13(6):768–78.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Hachamovitch R, Rozanski A, Shaw LJ, et al. Impact of ischaemia and scar on the therapeutic benefit derived from myocardial revascularization vs. medical therapy among patients undergoing stress-rest myocardial perfusion scintigraphy. Eur Heart J. 2011;32(8):1012–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Kim LJ, King 3rd SB, Kent K, et al. Factors related to the selection of surgical versus percutaneous revascularization in diabetic patients with multivessel coronary artery disease in the BARI 2D (Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation in Type 2 Diabetes) trial. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. 2009;2(5):384–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Shaw LJ, Berman DS, Maron DJ, et al. Optimal medical therapy with or without percutaneous coronary intervention to reduce ischemic burden: results from the Clinical Outcomes Utilizing Revascularization and Aggressive Drug Evaluation (COURAGE) trial nuclear substudy. Circulation. 2008;117(10):1283–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Fractional Flow Reserve: Measuring Pressures in the Marketplace. angioplasty.org: The Voice in the Ear. [http://www.ptca.org/voice/2014/11/06/fractional-flow-reserve-measuring-pressures-in-the-marketplace-2154] Accessed 4 April 2015.

  31. Kern MJ, Samady H. Current concepts of integrated coronary physiology in the catheterization laboratory. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;55(3):173–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. 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(11):3183–93.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Bech GJ, De Bruyne B, Pijls NH, et al. Fractional flow reserve to determine the appropriateness of angioplasty in moderate coronary stenosis: a randomized trial. Circulation. 2001;103(24):2928–34.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. 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(21):2105–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. 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(3):213–24.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. 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. 2010;56(3):177–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. 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. 2010;55(25):2816–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. De Bruyne B, Pijls NH, Kalesan B, et al. Fractional flow reserve-guided PCI versus medical therapy in stable coronary disease. N Engl J Med. 2012;367(11):991–1001.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. De Bruyne B, Fearon WF, Pijls NH, et al. Fractional flow reserve-guided PCI for stable coronary artery disease. The New England journal of medicine. 2014;371(13):1208–17. FAME 2 trial: Among patients with stable CAD, PCI to lesions with FFR ≤0.80 reduces the composite endpoint of death, non-fatal MI, and urgent revascularization compared to OMT alone, driven primarily by a reduction in urgent revascularization.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Windecker S, Kolh P, Alfonso F, et al. 2014 ESC/EACTS guidelines on myocardial revascularization. EuroIntervention. 2015;10(9):1024–94.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Johnson NP, Toth GG, Lai D, et al. Prognostic value of fractional flow reserve: linking physiologic severity to clinical outcomes. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;64(16):1641–54. Ischemia does not exist as a dichotomous state but rather as a graded continuum. FFR provides a continuous and independent marker for MACE outcomes that can risk stratify prognosis as modulated by revascularization.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Falk E, Shah PK, Fuster V. Coronary plaque disruption. Circulation. 1995;92(3):657–71.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Fayad ZA, Fuster V. Clinical imaging of the high-risk or vulnerable atherosclerotic plaque. Circ Res. 2001;89(4):305–16.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Glaser R, Selzer F, Faxon DP, et al. Clinical progression of incidental, asymptomatic lesions discovered during culprit vessel coronary intervention. Circulation. 2005;111(2):143–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Stone GW, Maehara A, Lansky AJ, et al. A prospective natural-history study of coronary atherosclerosis. N Engl J Med. 2011;364(3):226–35.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Narula J, Nakano M, Virmani R, et al. Histopathologic characteristics of atherosclerotic coronary disease and implications of the findings for the invasive and noninvasive detection of vulnerable plaques. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;61(10):1041–51.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Rade JJ. FFR-Guided PCI—FAME May Not Be So Fleeting after All. N Engl J Med. 2014;371(13):1251–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Virmani R, Burke AP, Farb A, Kolodgie FD. Pathology of the vulnerable plaque. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;47(8 Suppl):C13–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. De Bruyne B, Hersbach F, Pijls NH, et al. Abnormal epicardial coronary resistance in patients with diffuse atherosclerosis but “Normal” coronary angiography. Circulation. 2001;104(20):2401–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Taqueti VR, Hachamovitch R, Murthy VL, et al. Global coronary flow reserve is associated with adverse cardiovascular events independently of luminal angiographic severity and modifies the effect of early revascularization. Circulation. 2015;131(1):19–27.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Pijls NH, Klauss V, Siebert U, et al. Coronary pressure measurement after stenting predicts adverse events at follow-up: a multicenter registry. Circulation. 2002;105(25):2950–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Dorbala S, Di Carli MF, Beanlands RS, et al. Prognostic value of stress myocardial perfusion positron emission tomography: results from a multicenter observational registry. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;61(2):176–84.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Mancini GB, Hartigan PM, Bates ER, et al. Prognostic importance of coronary anatomy and left ventricular ejection fraction despite optimal therapy: assessment of residual risk in the Clinical Outcomes Utilizing Revascularization and Aggressive DruG Evaluation Trial. Am Heart J. 2013;166(3):481–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Nijjer SS, Sen S, Petraco R, et al. Pre-Angioplasty Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio Pullback Provides Virtual Intervention and Predicts Hemodynamic Outcome for Serial Lesions and Diffuse Coronary Artery Disease. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. 2014;7(12):1386–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Stanford University, Cardiovascular Research Center Aalst, Catharina Hospital Eindhoven, et al. A Comparison of Fractional Flow Reserve-Guided Percutaneous Coronary Intervention and Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery in Patients With Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease. In: ClinicalTrials.gov [Internet]. Bethesda (MD): National Library of Medicine (US). 2000- [cited 2015 Jun 04].Available from: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT02100722 NLM Identifier: NCT02100722.

  56. ECRI, Boston Scientific Corporation, Volcano Corporation. A Trial to Evaluate a New Strategy in the Functional Assessment of 3-vessel Disease Using the SYNTAX II Score in Patients Treated With PCI. In: ClinicalTrials.gov [Internet]. Bethesda (MD): National Library of Medicine (US). 2000- [cited 2015 Jun 4].Available from: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT02015832 NLM Identifier: NCT02015832

  57. New York University, Stanford University, National Heart L, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) et al. International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness With Medical and Invasive Approaches (ISCHEMIA). In: ClinicalTrials.gov [Internet]. Bethesda (MD): National Library of Medicine (US). 2000- [cited 2015 Jun 4].Available from: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT01471522 NLM Identifier: NCT01471522.

Download references

Compliance with Ethics Guidelines

Conflict of interest

N Kakouros has served as an Advisory Board Member to Volcano Corp.

JJ Rade reports no relevant conflicts of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, University of Massachusetts Medical School, 55 Lake Avenue North, Worcester, MA, 01655, USA

    Nikolaos Kakouros & Jeffrey J. Rade

Authors
  1. Nikolaos Kakouros
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jeffrey J. Rade
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Nikolaos Kakouros or Jeffrey J. Rade.

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Clinical Trials and Their Interpretations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kakouros, N., Rade, J.J. Role of Fractional-Flow Reserve in Guiding Percutaneous Revascularization in Stable Coronary Artery Disease. Curr Atheroscler Rep 17, 52 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11883-015-0530-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11883-015-0530-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation