Novel Indices of Coronary Physiology: Do We Need Alternatives to Fractional Flow Reserve?. [Review]

MedStar author(s):
Citation: Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions. 13(4):e008487, 2020 04.PMID: 32295416Institution: MedStar Heart & Vascular Institute | MedStar Washington Hospital CenterForm of publication: Journal ArticleMedline article type(s): Journal ArticleSubject headings: *Cardiac Catheterization | *Cardiac Imaging Techniques | *Coronary Artery Disease/di [Diagnosis] | *Coronary Vessels/dg [Diagnostic Imaging] | *Fractional Flow Reserve, Myocardial | Cardiac Catheterization/is [Instrumentation] | Cardiac Catheters | Coronary Artery Disease/pp [Physiopathology] | Coronary Vessels/pp [Physiopathology] | Humans | Predictive Value of Tests | Prognosis | Reproducibility of Results | Transducers, PressureYear: 2020Local holdings: Available online from MWHC library: 2008 - presentISSN:
  • 1941-7640
Name of journal: Circulation. Cardiovascular interventionsAbstract: Fractional flow reserve is the current invasive gold standard for assessing the ischemic potential of an angiographically intermediate coronary stenosis. Procedural cost and time, the need for coronary vessel instrumentation, and the need to administer adenosine to achieve maximal hyperemia remain integral components of invasive fractional flow reserve. The number of new alternatives to fractional flow reserve has proliferated over the last ten years using techniques ranging from alternative pressure wire metrics to anatomic simulation via angiography or intravascular imaging. This review article provides a critical description of the currently available or under-development alternatives to fractional flow reserve with a special focus on the available evidence, pros, and cons for each with a view towards their clinical application in the near future for the functional assessment of coronary artery disease.All authors: Banning AP, Barbato E, Bezerra HG, Collet C, Daemen J, Dan K, De Maria GL, Garcia-Garcia HM, Gonzalo Lopez N, Hideo-Kajita A, Jeremias A, Johnson NP, Lemos PA, Leone AM, Ozaki Y, Sarno G, Scarsini R, Shlofmitz E, Tebaldi M, Tu S, Waksman ROriginally published: Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions. 13(4):e008487, 2020 Apr.Fiscal year: FY2020Digital Object Identifier: Date added to catalog: 2020-07-09
Holdings
Item type Current library Collection Call number Status Date due Barcode
Journal Article MedStar Authors Catalog Article 32295416 Available 32295416

Available online from MWHC library: 2008 - present

Fractional flow reserve is the current invasive gold standard for assessing the ischemic potential of an angiographically intermediate coronary stenosis. Procedural cost and time, the need for coronary vessel instrumentation, and the need to administer adenosine to achieve maximal hyperemia remain integral components of invasive fractional flow reserve. The number of new alternatives to fractional flow reserve has proliferated over the last ten years using techniques ranging from alternative pressure wire metrics to anatomic simulation via angiography or intravascular imaging. This review article provides a critical description of the currently available or under-development alternatives to fractional flow reserve with a special focus on the available evidence, pros, and cons for each with a view towards their clinical application in the near future for the functional assessment of coronary artery disease.

English

Powered by Koha