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

Coronary Artery Disease in Aortic Stenosis: CABG + SAVR vs. TAVR + PCI: Data from Spanish Centers

Multiple randomized studies have shown comparable or superior efficacy of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) vs. coronary artery bypass graft (CABG).  However, many of...

Evolution of Small Balloon-Expandable Valves

Small aortic rings (20 mm) have posed a significant challenge for both surgery and transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) due to their association with an...

TCT 2024 | FAVOR III EUROPA

The study FAVOR III EUROPA, a randomized trial, included 2,000 patients with chronic coronary syndrome, or stabilized acute coronary syndrome, and intermediate lesions. 1,008...

TCT 2024 – ECLIPSE: Randomized Study of Orbital Atherectomy vs Conventional PCI in Severely Calcified Lesions

Coronary calcification is associated with stent under-expansion and increased risk of both early and late adverse events. Atherectomy is an essential tool for uncrossable...

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Related Articles

SOLACI Sessionsspot_img

Recent Articles

Severe Tricuspid Regurgitation: Surgical vs. Transcatheter Edge-to-Edge Repair

While highly prevalent, tricuspid regurgitation is a notably undertreated valvulopathy. Its progression has been associated with higher mortality and significant disability. According to the...

ACCESS-TAVI: Comparing Post TAVR Vascular Closure Devices

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a well-established option to treat elderly patients with severe symptomatic aortic valve stenosis. Technical advances and device development...

Endovascular Treatment of Iliofemoral Disease for the Improvement of Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction

Peripheral artery disease (PAD) is a significant risk factor in the development of difficult-to-treat conditions, such as heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF)....