Editorial

Picture perfect? Performance of quantitative coronary angiography-based vessel FFR versus pressure wire-based FFR

EuroIntervention 2022;17:1463-1465. DOI: 10.4244/EIJ-E-22-00005

Colin Berry
Colin Berry1,2, BSc, MBChB, PhD, FRCP, FESC, FACC; Daniel T. Y. Ang1,2, MBChB, MRCP
1. British Heart Foundation Glasgow Cardiovascular Research Centre, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom; 2. Department of Cardiology, Golden Jubilee National Hospital, Clydebank, United Kingdom
Measurement of fractional flow reserve (FFR) at the time of invasive coronary angiography is an established method for the assessment of epicardial coronary lesion severity. International guidelines recognise its role in guiding decisions on revascularisation12, specifically, an FFR >0.80 facilitates a safe deferral of coronary intervention3. The use of FFR alters clinician management plans in the catheterisation laboratory4, and more importantly, may lead to improved clinical outcomes in chronic and acute coronary syndromes56.

Despite these developments, FFR adoption remains limited in clinical practice, primarily due to the requirement for coronary instrumentation, increased procedural time and cost, and patient intolerance ...

Sign in to read and download the full article

Forgot your password?

No account yet?
Sign up for free!

Create my pcr account

Join us for free and access thousands of articles from EuroIntervention, as well as presentations, videos, cases from PCRonline.com

Read next article
Bioabsorbable polymer drug-eluting stents with 4-month dual antiplatelet therapy versus durable polymer drug-eluting stents with 12-month dual antiplatelet therapy in patients with left main coronary artery disease: the IDEAL-LM randomised trial

Latest news