Luise Gaede1, Helge Möllmann, Tanja Rudolph, Johannes Rieber, Florian Boenner, Monique Tröbs. 1. Department of Medicine 2 - Cardiology and Angiology, Friedrich-Alexander University of Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany; Department of Medicine I, St.-Johannes Hospital, Dortmund, Germany; Heart and Diabetes Center North Rhine-Westphalia, Department of Cardiology, Bad Oeynhausen, Germany; Department of Medicine I, Ludwig Maximilians University Munich, and Cardiology Practice, Munich, Germany; Department of Cardiology, Pulmonology and Angiology, Medical Faculty, Heinrich Heine University of Düsseldorf, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Approximately 800 000 coronary angiography procedures are per- formed in Germany each year, mainly in order to identify coronary artery stenoses. As a rule, revascularization is indicated only when coronary artery stenoses cause relevant ischemia, but this cannot be determined unequivocally by angiography alone. Pressure wire measurement and the measurement of fractional flow reserve (FFR) enable direct evaluation of the hemodynamic relevance of coronary artery stenoses during diagnostic coronary angiography. METHODS: This review is based on publications retrieved by a selective search in PubMed focusing especially on large randomized trials, registry studies, and meta- analyses on either pressure wire measurement or FFR. RESULTS: According to a registry study from France, the hemodynamic evaluation of a stenosis during coronary angiography affected decisions about revascularization in 43% of cases. Randomized multicenter trials have shown that a combined end- point consisting of death, myocardial infarction, or revascularization arose signifi- cantly less commonly in the FFR group than in the group receiving angiography without FFR (13.2% versus 18.3%; p = 0.02), and that patients with one or more hemodynamically significant coronary artery stenoses (FFR ≤ 0.80) benefited more from revascularization than from medical management alone (event rate, 8.1% versus 19.5%; p <0.001). It was also shown that revascularization yields no benefit if relevant ischemia has been ruled out, even if the angiogram shows high-grade coronary artery stenoses. CONCLUSION: All cardiac catheter laboratories should be capable of performing pres- sure wire measurements and measurements of FFR and should do so regularly if ischemia due to coronary artery stenosis cannot be demonstrated non-invasively. A pathological FFR measurement is an indication for revascularization.
BACKGROUND: Approximately 800 000 coronary angiography procedures are per- formed in Germany each year, mainly in order to identify coronary artery stenoses. As a rule, revascularization is indicated only when coronary artery stenoses cause relevant ischemia, but this cannot be determined unequivocally by angiography alone. Pressure wire measurement and the measurement of fractional flow reserve (FFR) enable direct evaluation of the hemodynamic relevance of coronary artery stenoses during diagnostic coronary angiography. METHODS: This review is based on publications retrieved by a selective search in PubMed focusing especially on large randomized trials, registry studies, and meta- analyses on either pressure wire measurement or FFR. RESULTS: According to a registry study from France, the hemodynamic evaluation of a stenosis during coronary angiography affected decisions about revascularization in 43% of cases. Randomized multicenter trials have shown that a combined end- point consisting of death, myocardial infarction, or revascularization arose signifi- cantly less commonly in the FFR group than in the group receiving angiography without FFR (13.2% versus 18.3%; p = 0.02), and that patients with one or more hemodynamically significant coronary artery stenoses (FFR ≤ 0.80) benefited more from revascularization than from medical management alone (event rate, 8.1% versus 19.5%; p <0.001). It was also shown that revascularization yields no benefit if relevant ischemia has been ruled out, even if the angiogram shows high-grade coronary artery stenoses. CONCLUSION: All cardiac catheter laboratories should be capable of performing pres- sure wire measurements and measurements of FFR and should do so regularly if ischemia due to coronary artery stenosis cannot be demonstrated non-invasively. A pathological FFR measurement is an indication for revascularization.
Authors: G J Bech; B De Bruyne; N H Pijls; E D de Muinck; J C Hoorntje; J Escaned; P R Stella; E Boersma; J Bartunek; J J Koolen; W Wijns Journal: Circulation Date: 2001-06-19 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Nico H J Pijls; William F Fearon; Pim A L Tonino; Uwe Siebert; Fumiaki Ikeno; Bernhard Bornschein; Marcel van't Veer; Volker Klauss; Ganesh Manoharan; Thomas Engstrøm; Keith G Oldroyd; Peter N Ver Lee; Philip A MacCarthy; Bernard De Bruyne Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2010-05-28 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Sayan Sen; Javier Escaned; Iqbal S Malik; Ghada W Mikhail; Rodney A Foale; Rafael Mila; Jason Tarkin; Ricardo Petraco; Christopher Broyd; Richard Jabbour; Amarjit Sethi; Christopher S Baker; Micheal Bellamy; Mahmud Al-Bustami; David Hackett; Masood Khan; David Lefroy; Kim H Parker; Alun D Hughes; Darrel P Francis; Carlo Di Mario; Jamil Mayet; Justin E Davies Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2011-12-07 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Nico H J Pijls; Pepijn van Schaardenburgh; Ganesh Manoharan; Eric Boersma; Jan-Willem Bech; Marcel van't Veer; Frits Bär; Jan Hoorntje; Jacques Koolen; William Wijns; Bernard de Bruyne Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2007-05-17 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: F Zijlstra; J C Hoorntje; M J de Boer; S Reiffers; K Miedema; J P Ottervanger; A W van 't Hof; H Suryapranata Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1999-11-04 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Rory Hachamovitch; Alan Rozanski; Leslee J Shaw; Gregg W Stone; Louise E J Thomson; John D Friedman; Sean W Hayes; Ishac Cohen; Guido Germano; Daniel S Berman Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2011-01-21 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Pim A L Tonino; Bernard De Bruyne; Nico H J Pijls; Uwe Siebert; Fumiaki Ikeno; Marcel van' t Veer; Volker Klauss; Ganesh Manoharan; Thomas Engstrøm; Keith G Oldroyd; Peter N Ver Lee; Philip A MacCarthy; William F Fearon Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2009-01-15 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Bernard De Bruyne; Nico H J Pijls; Bindu Kalesan; Emanuele Barbato; Pim A L Tonino; Zsolt Piroth; Nikola Jagic; Sven Möbius-Winkler; Sven Mobius-Winckler; Gilles Rioufol; Nils Witt; Petr Kala; Philip MacCarthy; Thomas Engström; Keith G Oldroyd; Kreton Mavromatis; Ganesh Manoharan; Peter Verlee; Ole Frobert; Nick Curzen; Jane B Johnson; Peter Jüni; William F Fearon Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2012-08-27 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Ricardo Petraco; Javier Escaned; Sayan Sen; Sukhjinder Nijjer; Kaleab N Asrress; Mauro Echavarria-Pinto; Tim Lockie; Muhammed Z Khawaja; Cecilia Cuevas; Nicolas Foin; Christopher Broyd; Rodney A Foale; Nearchos Hadjiloizou; Iqbal S Malik; Ghada W Mikhail; Amarjit Sethi; Raffi Kaprielian; Christopher S Baker; David Lefroy; Michael Bellamy; Mahmud Al-Bustami; Masood A Khan; Alun D Hughes; Darrel P Francis; Jamil Mayet; Carlo Di Mario; Simon Redwood; Justin E Davies Journal: EuroIntervention Date: 2013-05-20 Impact factor: 6.534
Authors: Hans R Figulla; Alexander Lauten; Lars S Maier; Udo Sechtem; Sigmund Silber; Holger Thiele Journal: Dtsch Arztebl Int Date: 2020-02-28 Impact factor: 5.594