open access

Vol 13, No 3 (2018)
Review Papers
Published online: 2018-07-15
Get Citation

Assessment of fractional flow reserve (FFR) vs iFR — do we need new technology for the diagnosis of coronary stenosis?

Bartosz Górny, Wojciech Balak, Władysław Sinkiewicz
DOI: 10.5603/FC.2018.0044
·
Folia Cardiologica 2018;13(3):236-239.

open access

Vol 13, No 3 (2018)
Review Papers
Published online: 2018-07-15

Abstract

Fractional flow reserve (FFR) is a technique, which allows the accurate assessment of stenosis severity and can be easily and quickly measured during coronary angiography. For past years, FFR has been a basic tool in interventional cardiology, allowing to assess the potential benefit of revascularisation of coronary artery disease. Instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) is a recently developed, helpful physiological index, used to evaluate the severity of stenosis, calculated by measuring the resting pressure gradient across a coronary lesion during the portion of diastole. During the American College of Cardiology 2017 Scientific Session in Washington, the outcomes of two large, randomised trials were presented: iFR-SWEDEHEART and DEFINE-FLAIR, comparing iFR vs FFR with a combined total of 4,500 patients. The outcomes show, that iFR is non-inferior to FFR, with similar rates of major adverse cardiac events. We have to wait for the results from further randomised studies, comparing FFR with iFR and long-term follow-up of patients, who were assigned to undergo evaluation of stenosis severity.

Abstract

Fractional flow reserve (FFR) is a technique, which allows the accurate assessment of stenosis severity and can be easily and quickly measured during coronary angiography. For past years, FFR has been a basic tool in interventional cardiology, allowing to assess the potential benefit of revascularisation of coronary artery disease. Instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) is a recently developed, helpful physiological index, used to evaluate the severity of stenosis, calculated by measuring the resting pressure gradient across a coronary lesion during the portion of diastole. During the American College of Cardiology 2017 Scientific Session in Washington, the outcomes of two large, randomised trials were presented: iFR-SWEDEHEART and DEFINE-FLAIR, comparing iFR vs FFR with a combined total of 4,500 patients. The outcomes show, that iFR is non-inferior to FFR, with similar rates of major adverse cardiac events. We have to wait for the results from further randomised studies, comparing FFR with iFR and long-term follow-up of patients, who were assigned to undergo evaluation of stenosis severity.

Get Citation

Keywords

FFR, iFR, fractional flow reserve, instant wave-free ratio, revascularisation, percutaneous coronary intervention, DEFINE-FLAIR, iFR-SWEDEHEART

About this article
Title

Assessment of fractional flow reserve (FFR) vs iFR — do we need new technology for the diagnosis of coronary stenosis?

Journal

Folia Cardiologica

Issue

Vol 13, No 3 (2018)

Pages

236-239

Published online

2018-07-15

DOI

10.5603/FC.2018.0044

Bibliographic record

Folia Cardiologica 2018;13(3):236-239.

Keywords

FFR
iFR
fractional flow reserve
instant wave-free ratio
revascularisation
percutaneous coronary intervention
DEFINE-FLAIR
iFR-SWEDEHEART

Authors

Bartosz Górny
Wojciech Balak
Władysław Sinkiewicz

References (11)
  1. 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): 3183–3193.
  2. 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(26): 1703–1708.
  3. Pijls NHJ, 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): 2105–2111.
  4. Botman KJ, Pijls NHJ, Bech JW, et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention or bypass surgery in multivessel disease? A tailored approach based on coronary pressure measurement. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2004; 63(2): 184–191.
  5. Toth G, De Bruyne B, Casselman F, et al. Fractional flow reserve-guided versus angiography-guided coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Circulation. 2013; 128(13): 1405–1411.
  6. Tonino PAL, 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): 2816–2821.
  7. Escaned J, Echavarría-Pinto M, Garcia-Garcia HM, et al. ADVISE II Study Group. Prospective assessment of the dagnostic accuracy of instantaneous wave-free ratio to assess coronary stenosis relevance: results of ADVISE II international, multicenter study (ADenosine Vasodilator Independent Stenosis Evaluation II). JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2015; 8(6): 824–833.
  8. Davies JE, Sen S, Dehbi HM, et al. Use of the instantaneous wave-free ratio or fractional flow reserve in PCI. N Engl J Med. 2017; 376(19): 1824–1834.
  9. Götberg M, Christiansen EH, Gudmundsdottir IJ, et al. iFR-SWEDEHEART Investigators. Instantaneous wave-free ratio versus fractional flow reserve to guide PCI. N Engl J Med. 2017; 376(19): 1813–1823.
  10. https://www.tctmd.com/news/ifr-matches-ffr-clinical-outcomes-patients-intermediate-lesions (06.07.2017).
  11. Bhatt DL. Assessment of stable coronary lesions. N Engl J Med. 2017; 376(19): 1879–1881.

Important: This website uses cookies. More >>

The cookies allow us to identify your computer and find out details about your last visit. They remembering whether you've visited the site before, so that you remain logged in - or to help us work out how many new website visitors we get each month. Most internet browsers accept cookies automatically, but you can change the settings of your browser to erase cookies or prevent automatic acceptance if you prefer.

 

Wydawcą serwisu jest  "Via Medica sp. z o.o." sp.k., ul. Świętokrzyska 73, 80–180 Gdańsk

tel.:+48 58 320 94 94, faks:+48 58 320 94 60, e-mail:  viamedica@viamedica.pl