Cutoff FFR Values, What to Do in the “Grey Zone”

Original Title: Significance of Intermediate Values of Fractional Flow Reserve in Patients with Coronary Artery Disease. Reference: Julien Adjedj et al. Circulation. 2016 Jan 5. Epub ahead of print.

The fractional flow reserve (FFR) value of 0.75 has been validated against tests for inducible ischemia, whereas the value 0.80 has been widely accepted to guide the clinical practice. All the same, there is a “grey zone” between 0.76 and 0.85 where deciding for one of the two treatment strategies over the other remains arguable.

The study included all patients with single segment disease and an FFR value within the grey area (0.70 – 0.75 and 0.81 – 0.85) between 1997 and 2013. Primary end point was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE: death, infarction, and any revascularization) within a 5 year follow up.
During this period, 17380 FFR measurements were carried out; 1459 were found in this grey zone and were analyzed. 449 of these were treated with revascularization and 1010 with medical treatment.

In the grey zone, MACE rate was similar between the medical treatment and revascularization groups (13.9% vs. 11.2% respectively; p=0.3). There was a strong trend towards higher death and infarction rates (9.4 vs. 4.8; p=0.06) and higher all cause death rate (7.5 vs. 3.2; p=0.059) in the medical treatment group.

In patients receiving medical treatment, there was a progressive increase in MACE as FFR decreased (de 0.85 a 0.70) especially for proximal lesions; however, patients receiving revascularization did not show this gradient, but a similar MACE rate in all value strata.

Conclusion
FFR in the “grey zone” still has great prognosis value, especially when it comes to proximal lesions. These data confirm the FFR cutoff value ≤ 0.80 is valid to guide our clinical practice.

More articles by this author

CRT 2026 | CUT-DRESS Trial: Lesion Preparation with Cutting Balloon

In-stent restenosis (ISR) continues to represent a relevant clinical challenge in contemporary coronary angioplasty practice. Despite advances in drug-eluting stents, neointimal hyperplasia and suboptimal...

CRT 2026 | Clopidogrel vs Aspirin as Long-Term Monotherapy After Coronary Angioplasty

The use of aspirin as chronic antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has historically been the standard recommended by international guidelines. However, recent...

Bioresorbable devices vs DES in patients at high risk of restenosis. Seven-year follow-up of the COMPARE-ABSORB trial

Studies with second-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) have shown that the rate of target lesion failure (TLF) increases linearly up to 5–10 years of follow-up,...

Sheathless Femoral Impella: A New Strategy to Reduce Vascular Complications in High-Risk PCI?

Patients with complex coronary artery disease or cardiogenic shock undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) may benefit from the hemodynamic support provided by percutaneous ventricular...

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Related Articles

SOLACI Sessionsspot_img

Recent Articles

Percutaneous Mechanical Aspiration versus Surgical Treatment of Tricuspid Valve Endocarditis

Tricuspid valve infective endocarditis (TVIE) accounts for approximately 5% to 10% of all cases of infective endocarditis. Surgical treatment remains the standard therapy in...

CRT 2026 | TAVI-CLOSE Trial: Dual Suture vs Suture + Plug for Vascular Closure After Transfemoral TAVI

The transfemoral approach is the predominant strategy for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Although vascular complications are currently less frequent, they remain relevant determinants...

CRT 2026 | NAVITOR IDE: Hemodynamic Outcomes and 5-Year Durability of an Intra-Annular Self-Expanding Transcatheter Aortic Valve

As TAVI expands into younger populations and patients with lower surgical risk, prosthesis durability has become a key aspect of long-term management. The NAVITOR...