Angiographic results alone can guide the decision to perform a percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Angiography is used to visually assess the coronary anatomy and determine the degree of stenosis, plaque or blockage in the coronary artery. The blockage creates visual irregularities of the inner diameter of coronary vessels on angiography and those irregularities are quantified using a percentage. This percentage correlates with the degree of blockage of the artery. The degree of blockage is usually quantified with a percentage and categorized into mild, moderate/intermediate or severe.
The assessment of intermediate blockages in coronary artery disease has long been a challenge for interventional cardiologists to determine the appropriate use of angioplasty and stenting. Fractional Flow Reserve (FFR) offers yet another tool to assist in identification of those intermediate blockages. The goal of angioplasty and stenting in the coronary arteries is to increase blood flow to the heart and in turn, relieve chest pain. However, studies have shown that if a functional measurement, such as FFR, shows that the flow is not significantly blocked, the blockage or lesion does not need to be revascularized (angioplasty/stenting), and a physician can treat the patient with medical therapy safely.
FFR is a guide wire-based procedure that can accurately measure blood pressure and flow through an isolated segment of a coronary artery. A physician can do FFR through a standard diagnostic catheter at the time of a coronary angiogram or cardiac catheterization. FFR has been demonstrated to be useful in the assessment of “intermediate” blockages (coronary artery disease) to determine the need for angioplasty or stenting.
FFR is obtained as part of diagnostic cardiac catheterization. A guide catheter is utilized to advance the FFR-specific guide wire to the coronary artery orifice. At which point, a coronary artery pressure proximal to the stenotic lesion (or Pa) is obtained. The operator (or interventional cardiologist) then advances the FFR-specific guide wire and crosses the intermediate stenotic lesion allowing for coronary artery pressure distal to the stenosis (or Pd) to be obtained. The pressure sensor can be visualized angiographically by the operator, to help ensure proper placement.
FFR measurements must be obtained during a period of maximal blood flow or maximal hyperemia. To achieve maximal hyperemia, a hyperemic stimulus is administered either intravenously or intracoronary through the guide catheter, FFR is monitored for a period of 3 to 4 minutes. Intravenous (IV) adenosine is the most widely used method to induce maximal hyperemia.
FFR is defined as the ratio of maximum achievable blood flow through a blockage (area of stenosis) to the maximum achievable blood flow in the same vessel in the hypothetical absence of the blockage. It is calculated using a pressure ratio of pressure measured distal to the blockage (Pd) and pressure proximal to the blockage (Pa).
The ‘‘normal’’ ratio is expected to be 1. For example, an FFR value of 0.80 means that the maximum blood flow in the coronary artery being measured is 80% of what it would be if the artery were completely normal.
FFR = Pd / Pa
In utilizing FFR, coronary stenosis can be classified into three groups based on physiologic assessment during coronary angiography:
Coronary artery disease (CAD) is one of the leading causes of death in the United States, accounting for 1 out of every 4 deaths annually. Coronary revascularization has long been a definitive treatment for reducing symptoms, myocardial infarction and death in acute coronary syndromes (ACS). However, coronary revascularization is not as clear in stable CAD.
One of the major setbacks with coronary revascularization has been the dependence on angiographic (or visual estimation) analysis of lesions. During angiography, a number of factors are considered which will ultimately dictate the best treatment course. These include the patient’s symptoms, clinical characteristics, an angiographic appearance of the coronary anatomy, and alternative options, which may include CABG. This leaves a large area of operator variability with regards to interpretation and treatment. This lack of clarity has led to inappropriate stenting cases, which have been well publicized. This focus has drawn attention from media, providers, clinicians, and payors to develop criteria and guidelines, standardizing the process of coronary revascularization.
Some trials have been published, helping to establish the Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC) for coronary revascularization. The AUC is the good intent to ensure that the right procedure is performed on the right patient at the right time for the right reasons, to achieve the best possible outcome. Reliance on clinical trials, guidelines, and AUC serve as the framework upon which coronary revascularization is performed.
The development of FFR arose in the early 1990s as a means of selecting physiologically significant lesions. The DEFER (2001) trial was the first major landmark trial, showcasing FFR and demonstrating coronary revascularization could be safely deferred when lesions had an FFR greater than 0.75. However, FFR was not widely used in subsequent years for a variety of reasons.
The Clinical Outcomes Utilizing Revascularization and Aggressive Drug Evaluation (COURAGE, 2007) studied PCI in patients with stable CAD and high-grade coronary stenosis, randomizing patients to PCI versus optimal medical therapy. The COURAGE trial failed to demonstrate the benefit with routine revascularization of coronary lesions when compared to optimal medical therapy alone. This landmark trial along with inappropriate stenting and further establishment of AUC and guidelines brought FFR back to the forefront.
The Fractional Flow Reserve versus Angiography for Multivessel Evaluation (FAME, 2009) compared patients undergoing routine PCI for stable multivessel CAD to either FFR-guided or angiography-guided PCI with both groups being on OMT. FAME (2009) demonstrated that FFR was superior to traditional angiography-guided PCI among patients with stable multivessel CAD demonstrating lower 1-year adverse events and reduced costs. This trial paved the way for continued study and evaluation of FFR capability when compared to OMT, as demonstrated in the COURAGE (2007) trial. Fractional Flow Reserve versus Angiography for Multivessel Evaluation 2 (FAME 2, 2011) studied the role of PCI among patients with stable single or multivessel CAD with physiologically significant coronary lesions. In contrast to FAME, FAME 2 focused on patients with FFR less than or equal to 0.80, comparing PCI to OMT alone. Among patients with stable CAD with FFR less than or equal to 0.80, PCI demonstrated overall better outcomes with regards to death, nonfatal MI, and urgent revascularization.
The preponderance of clinical trial evidence for FFR driven revascularization prompted incorporation of FFR into the 2011 American College of Cardiology (ACC)/American Heart Association (AHA) and 2014 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS) Guidelines.
|Fractional flow reserve-guided PCI versus medical therapy in stable coronary disease., De Bruyne B,Pijls NH,Kalesan B,Barbato E,Tonino PA,Piroth Z,Jagic N,Möbius-Winkler S,Rioufol G,Witt N,Kala P,MacCarthy P,Engström T,Oldroyd KG,Mavromatis K,Manoharan G,Verlee P,Frobert O,Curzen N,Johnson JB,Jüni P,Fearon WF,, The New England journal of medicine, 2012 Sep 13 [PubMed PMID: 22924638]|
|Fractional flow reserve versus angiography guided percutaneous coronary intervention: An updated systematic review., Enezate T,Omran J,Al-Dadah AS,Alpert M,White CJ,Abu-Fadel M,Aronow H,Cohen M,Aguirre F,Patel M,Mahmud E,, Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions, 2017 Oct 5 [PubMed PMID: 28980386]|
|Fractional flow reserve: an updated review., Elgendy IY,Conti CR,Bavry AA,, Clinical cardiology, 2014 Jun [PubMed PMID: 24652785]|
|2012 ACCF/AHA/ACP/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS Guideline for the diagnosis and management of patients with stable ischemic heart disease: a 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., Fihn SD,Gardin JM,Abrams J,Berra K,Blankenship JC,Dallas AP,Douglas PS,Foody JM,Gerber TC,Hinderliter AL,King SB 3rd,Kligfield PD,Krumholz HM,Kwong RY,Lim MJ,Linderbaum JA,Mack MJ,Munger MA,Prager RL,Sabik JF,Shaw LJ,Sikkema JD,Smith CR Jr,Smith SC Jr,Spertus JA,Williams SV,, Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 2012 Dec 18 [PubMed PMID: 23182125]|
|[2014 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization]., Windecker S,Kolh P,Alfonso F,Collet JP,Cremer J,Falk V,Filippatos G,Hamm C,Head SJ,Jüni P,Kappetein AP,Kastrati A,Knuuti J,Landmesser U,Laufer G,Neumann FJ,Richter DJ,Schauerte P,Uva MS,Stefanini GG,Taggart DP,Torracca L,Valgimigli M,Wijns W,Witkowski A,, Kardiologia polska, 2014 [PubMed PMID: 25524605]|
|2015 ACC/AHA/SCAI Focused Update on Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Patients With ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: An Update of the 2011 ACCF/AHA/SCAI Guideline for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention and the 2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction., Levine GN,Bates ER,Blankenship JC,Bailey SR,Bittl JA,Cercek B,Chambers CE,Ellis SG,Guyton RA,Hollenberg SM,Khot UN,Lange RA,Mauri L,Mehran R,Moussa ID,Mukherjee D,Ting HH,O'Gara PT,Kushner FG,Ascheim DD,Brindis RG,Casey DE Jr,Chung MK,de Lemos JA,Diercks DB,Fang JC,Franklin BA,Granger CB,Krumholz HM,Linderbaum JA,Morrow DA,Newby LK,Ornato JP,Ou N,Radford MJ,Tamis-Holland JE,Tommaso CL,Tracy CM,Woo YJ,Zhao DX,, Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 2016 Mar 15 [PubMed PMID: 26498666]|
|2011 ACCF/AHA/SCAI Guideline for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: executive summary: 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., Levine GN,Bates ER,Blankenship JC,Bailey SR,Bittl JA,Cercek B,Chambers CE,Ellis SG,Guyton RA,Hollenberg SM,Khot UN,Lange RA,Mauri L,Mehran R,Moussa ID,Mukherjee D,Nallamothu BK,Ting HH,, Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions, 2012 Feb 15 [PubMed PMID: 22328235]|
|Expert consensus statement on the use of fractional flow reserve, intravascular ultrasound, and optical coherence tomography: a consensus statement of the Society of Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions., Lotfi A,Jeremias A,Fearon WF,Feldman MD,Mehran R,Messenger JC,Grines CL,Dean LS,Kern MJ,Klein LW,, Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions, 2014 Mar 1 [PubMed PMID: 24227282]|
|ACC/AATS/AHA/ASE/ASNC/SCAI/SCCT/STS 2017 Appropriate Use Criteria for Coronary Revascularization in Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart Disease : A Report of the American College of Cardiology Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, American Heart Association, American Society of Echocardiography, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons., Patel MR,Calhoon JH,Dehmer GJ,Grantham JA,Maddox TM,Maron DJ,Smith PK,, Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, 2017 Oct [PubMed PMID: 28608183]|
|ACCF/SCAI/STS/AATS/AHA/ASNC/HFSA/SCCT 2012 appropriate use criteria for coronary revascularization focused update: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Thoracic Surgeons, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, American Heart Association, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, and the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography., Patel MR,Dehmer GJ,Hirshfeld JW,Smith PK,Spertus JA,Masoudi FA,Dehmer GJ,Patel MR,Smith PK,Chambers CE,Ferguson TB Jr,Garcia MJ,Grover FL,Holmes DR Jr,Klein LW,Limacher MC,Mack MJ,Malenka DJ,Park MH,Ragosta M 3rd,Ritchie JL,Rose GA,Rosenberg AB,Russo AM,Shemin RJ,Weintraub WS,Wolk MJ,Bailey SR,Douglas PS,Hendel RC,Kramer CM,Min JK,Patel MR,Shaw L,Stainback RF,Allen JM,, The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery, 2012 Apr [PubMed PMID: 22424518]|
|Measurement of fractional flow reserve to assess the functional severity of coronary-artery stenoses., Pijls NH,De Bruyne B,Peels K,Van Der Voort PH,Bonnier HJ,Bartunek J Koolen JJ,Koolen JJ,, The New England journal of medicine, 1996 Jun 27 [PubMed PMID: 8637515]|
|Percutaneous coronary intervention of functionally nonsignificant stenosis: 5-year follow-up of the DEFER Study., Pijls NH,van Schaardenburgh P,Manoharan G,Boersma E,Bech JW,van't Veer M,Bär F,Hoorntje J,Koolen J,Wijns W,de Bruyne B,, Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 2007 May 29 [PubMed PMID: 17531660]|
|Fractional flow reserve versus angiography for guidance of PCI in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (FAME): 5-year follow-up of a randomised controlled trial., van Nunen LX,Zimmermann FM,Tonino PA,Barbato E,Baumbach A,Engstrøm T,Klauss V,MacCarthy PA,Manoharan G,Oldroyd KG,Ver Lee PN,Van't Veer M,Fearon WF,De Bruyne B,Pijls NH,, Lancet (London, England), 2015 Nov 7 [PubMed PMID: 26333474]|
|Deferral vs. performance of percutaneous coronary intervention of functionally non-significant coronary stenosis: 15-year follow-up of the DEFER trial., Zimmermann FM,Ferrara A,Johnson NP,van Nunen LX,Escaned J,Albertsson P,Erbel R,Legrand V,Gwon HC,Remkes WS,Stella PR,van Schaardenburgh P,Bech GJ,De Bruyne B,Pijls NH,, European heart journal, 2015 Dec 1 [PubMed PMID: 26400825]|