scholarly journals Fractional Flow Reserve: Patient Selection and Perspectives

2021 ◽  
Vol Volume 17 ◽  
pp. 817-831
Author(s):  
Joyce Peper ◽  
Leonie M Becker ◽  
Jan-Peter van Kuijk ◽  
Tim Leiner ◽  
Martin J Swaans
2011 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 252-256
Author(s):  
Marcin Protasiewicz ◽  
Karol Początek ◽  
Marta Negrusz-Kawecka ◽  
Przemysław Nowicki ◽  
Paweł Szymkiewicz ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 17
Author(s):  
Shah R Mohdnazri ◽  
◽  
◽  
◽  
Thomas R Keeble ◽  
...  

Fractional flow reserve (FFR) has been shown to improve outcomes when used to guide percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). There have been two proposed cut-off points for FFR. The first was derived by comparing FFR against a series of non-invasive tests, with a value of ≤0.75 shown to predict a positive ischaemia test. It was then shown in the DEFER study that a vessel FFR value of ≥0.75 was associated with safe deferral of PCI. During the validation phase, a ‘grey zone’ for FFR values of between 0.76 and 0.80 was demonstrated, where a positive non-invasive test may still occur, but sensitivity and specificity were sub-optimal. Clinical judgement was therefore advised for values in this range. The FAME studies then moved the FFR cut-off point to ≤0.80, with a view to predicting outcomes. The ≤0.80 cut-off point has been adopted into clinical practice guidelines, whereas the lower value of ≤0.75 is no longer widely used. Here, the authors discuss the data underpinning these cut-off values and the practical implications for their use when using FFR guidance in PCI.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document