Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 30, 2025
Interventional Diagnostic Procedure: A Practical Guide for the Assessment of Coronary Vascular Function
Published on: March 15, 2022
Prognostic differences between physiology-guided percutaneous coronary intervention and optimal medical therapy in
Utsho Islam1, Muhammad Sabbah1, Burcu T Özbek1
1The Heart Center, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Insights
Percutaneous coronary revascularization (PCI) improves outcomes for coronary artery disease (CAD) patients with fractional flow reserve (FFR) ≤0.80. Optimal medical therapy (OMT) is better for FFR >0.80, supporting current FFR guidelines.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Interventional Cardiology
- Medical Imaging
Background:
- Fractional flow reserve (FFR) guides revascularization in coronary artery disease (CAD).
- Optimal treatment strategies remain debated for intermediate FFR values (grey-zone).
Purpose of the Study:
- To systematically review evidence comparing percutaneous coronary revascularization (PCI) and optimal medical therapy (OMT) in CAD patients.
- To clarify treatment benefits based on FFR values.
Main Methods:
- Systematic review and pooled analysis of randomized controlled trials and observational studies.
- Included 16 studies with 27,451 patients.
- Outcomes: Major Adverse Cardiac Events (MACE), death, myocardial infarction (MI), repeat revascularization.
Main Results:
- PCI showed prognostic advantage over OMT for FFR ≤0.80 (RR: 0.64).
- OMT benefited patients with FFR >0.80 (RR: 1.38).
- No significant MACE difference in grey-zone (FFR 0.75-0.80), but PCI reduced repeat revascularization (RR: 0.54).
Conclusions:
- OMT is favorable for CAD patients with FFR >0.80.
- Revascularization (PCI) is superior for FFR ≤0.80 in reducing MACE.
- Evidence supports using FFR ≤0.80 as a cut-off for revascularization decisions.
Background:
Intracoronary physiology, particularly fractional flow reserve (FFR), has been used as a guide for revascularization for patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). The optimal treatment in the physiological grey-zone area has been unclear and remains subject to ongoing debate.
Methods:
We conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled trials and observational studies comparing the prognostic effect of percutaneous coronary revascularization (PCI) and optimal medical therapy (OMT) in patients with CAD. Studies were identified by medical literature databases. The outcomes of interest were major adverse cardiac events (MACE) and its components, death, myocardial infarction (MI), and repeat revascularization.
Results:
A total of 16 studies with 27,451 patients were included. The pooled analysis demonstrated that PCI was associated with a prognostic advantage over OMT in patients with FFR value ≤0.80 (RR: 0.64, 95 % CI: 0.45-0.90, p < 0.01). Patients with an FFR value >0.80 were shown to benefit more from OMT (RR 1.38, 95 % CI 1.24-1.53, p < 0.01). The analysis also showed that there was no significant difference in MACE in the grey-zone area (FFR 0.75-0.80) (RR 0.64, 95 % CI: 0.35-1.16, p = 0.14), but a significant reduction in repeat revascularization (RR 0.54, 95 % CI, 0.31-0.91, p < 0.01) when patients were treated with PCI.
Conclusions:
Among patients with CAD and FFR values >0.80, OMT was associated with favorable outcomes over PCI in reducing the risk of MACE. However, among patients with FFR values ≤0.80, revascularization was superior in terms of reducing MACE. The available evidence supports the guideline-recommended use of an FFR cut-off of ≤0.80.
