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

ACC 2026 | DKCRUSH VIII: IVUS or angiography to guide PCI in complex coronary bifurcations

Intracoronary imaging guidance has become an established recommended strategy in complex coronary lesions. In the specific setting of complex bifurcations, uncertainty remained regarding the...

ACC 2026 | OPTIMAL: IVUS Guidance in PCI of the Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is considered an equivalent alternative to coronary artery bypass surgery in patients with left main coronary artery (LMCA) stenosis and...

ACC 2026 | IVUS-CHIP Trial: Intravascular ultrasound–guided versus angiography-guided complex PCI

Optimization of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in complex lesions remains a relevant clinical challenge. In this context, the IVUS-CHIP trial was designed to evaluate...

ACC 2026 | ALL-RISE Trial: Coronary Physiological Assessment Using FFRangio

Coronary physiological assessment using pressure-wire techniques (FFR/iFR) carries a Class IA recommendation in ACC/AHA guidelines; however, its use remains limited due to factors such...

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Related Articles

SOLACI Sessionsspot_img

Recent Articles

Therapeutic strategies in carotid free-floating thrombus: evidence and controversies

Carotid free-floating thrombus (cFFT) is a rare entity with a high embolic risk, associated with acute neurological events such as stroke or transient ischemic...

The Two Sides of the Coin: What Do CHAMPION-AF and CLOSURE-AF Teach Us About Left Atrial Appendage Closure?

Letter to the editor: Juan Manuel Pérez Asorey Percutaneous left atrial appendage closure (LAAO) is currently going through one of the most interesting stages of...

CLOSURE-AF: Percutaneous Left Atrial Appendage Closure versus Medical Therapy in Atrial Fibrillation

Percutaneous left atrial appendage closure has been proposed as an alternative to anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation and high bleeding risk; however, comparative...