Functional assessment of coronary stenosis by fractional flow reserve

1. Gruentzig A, Senning A, Siegenthaler WE. Nonoperative dilatation of coronary artery stenosis: percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. N Engl J Med 1979; 301(2): 61–68.

2. Pijls NH, van Son JA, Kirkeeide RL et al. Experimental basis of determining maximum coronary, myocardial, and collateral blood flow by pressure measurements for assessing functional stenosis severity before and after percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. Circulation 1993; 87(4): 1354–1367.

3. Pijls NH, Van Gelder B, Van der Voort P et al. Fractional flow reserve: A useful index to evaluate the influence of an epicardial coronary stenosis on myocardial blood flow. Circulation 1995; 92(11): 3183–3193.

4. Pijls NH, De Bruyne B, Peels K et al. Measurement of fractional flow reserve to assess the functional severity of coronary artery stenoses. N Engl J Med 1996; 334(26): 1703–1708.

5. Boden WE, O’Rourke RA, Teo KK et al. Optimal Medical Therapy with or without PCI for Stable Coronary Disease. N Engl J Med 2007; 356(15): 1503–1516.

6. Pijls NH, van Schaardenburgh P, Manoharan G et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention of functionally nonsignificant stenosis: 5-year follow-up of the DEFER Study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007; 49(21): 2105–2111.

7. Uren NG, Melin JA, De Bruyne B. Relation between myocardial blood flow and the severity of coronary-artery stenosis. N Engl J Med 1994; 330(25): 1782–1788.

8. Johnson NP, Kirkeeide RL, Gould KL. Coronary anatomy to predict physiology: fundamental limits. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging 2013; 6(5): 817–832.

9. Heijenbrok-Kal MH, Fleischmann KE, Hunink MG. Stress echocardiography, stress single-photon-emission computed tomography and electron beam computed tomography for the assessment of coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis of diagnostic performance. Am Heart J 2007; 154(3): 415–423.

10. McArdle BA, Dowsley TF, deKemp RA et al. Does rubidium-82 PET have superior accuracy to SPECT perfusion imaging for the diagnosis of obstructive coronary disease?: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2012; 60(18): 1828–1837.

11. de Jong MC, Genders TS, van Geuns RJ et al. Diagnostic performance of stress myocardial perfusion imaging for coronary artery disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Radiol 2012; 22(9): 1881–1895.

12. Nandalur KR, Dwamena BA, Choudhri AF et al. Diagnostic performance of stress cardiac magnetic resonance imaging in the detection of coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007; 50(4): 1343–1353.

13. Lima RS, Watson DD, Goode AR et al. Incremental value of combined perfusion and function over perfusion alone by gated SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging for detection of severe three-vessel coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol 2003; 42(1): 64–70.

14. Montalescot G, Sechtem U, Achenbach S et al. 2013 ESC guidelines on the management of stable coronary artery disease: the Task Force on the management of stable coronary artery disease of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J 2013; 34(38): 2949–3003.

15. Windecker S, Kolh P, Alfonso F et al. 2014 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization: the task force on myocardial revascularization of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS) developed with the special contribution of the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI). Eur Heart J 2014; 35(37): 2541–2619.

16. Camici PG, Crea F. Coronary microvascular dysfunction. N Engl J Med 2007; 356(8): 830–840.

17. Lanza GA, Crea F. Primary coronary microvascular dysfunction: clinical presentation, pathophysiology, and management. Circulation 2010; 121(21): 2317–2325.

18. De Bruyne B, Pijls NH, Barbato E et al. Intracoronary and intravenous adenosine 5‘-triphosphate, adenosine, papaverine, and contrast medium to assess fractional flow reserve in humans. Circulation 2003; 107(14): 1877–1883.

19. McGeoch RJ, Oldroyd KG. Pharmacological options for inducing maximal hyperaemia during studies of coronary physiology. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2008; 71(2): 198–204.

20. Nair PK, Marroquin OC, Mulukutla SR et al. Clinical utility of regadenoson for assessing fractional flow reserve. J Am Coll Cardiovasc Interv 2011; 4(10): 1085–1092.

21. Pijls NH, Tonino PA. The crux of maximum hyperemia: The last remaining barrier for routine use of fractional flow reserve. J Am Coll Cardiovasc Interv 2011; 4(10): 1093–1095.

22. Zimmermann FM, Ferrara A, Johnson NP et al. Deferral vs. performance of percutaneous coronary intervention of functionally non-significant coronary stenosis: 15-year follow-up of the DEFER trial. Eur Heart J 2015; 36(45): 3182–3188.

23. Tonino PA, De Bruyne B, Pijls NH et al. Fractional flow reserve versus angiography for guiding percutaneous coronary intervention. N Engl J Med 2009; 360(3): 213–224.

24. van Nunen LX, Zimmermann FM, Tonino PAL et al. Fractional flow reserve versus angiography for guidance of PCI in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (FAME): 5-year follow-up of a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2015; 386(10006): 1853–1860.

25. De Bruyne B, Pijls NH, Kalesan B et al. Fractional flow reserve-guided PCI versus medical therapy in stable coronary disease. N Engl J Med 2012; 367(11): 991–1001.

26. De Bruyne B, Fearon WF, Pijls NH et al. Fractional flow reserve-guided PCI for stable coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med 2014; 371(13): 1208–1217.

27. Zimmermann FM, De Bruyne B, Pijls NHJ et al. Rationale and design of the Fractional Flow Reserve versus Angiography for Multivessel Evaluation (FAME) 3 Trial: A comparison of fractional flow reserve-guided percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass graft surgery in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease. Am Heart J 2015; 170(4): 619–626.

28. Serruys PW, Morice MC, Kappetein AP et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary-artery bypass grafting for severe coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med 2009; 360(10): 961–972.

29. Sen S, Escaned J, Malik IS et al. Development and validation of a new adenosine-independent index of stenosis severity from coronary wave-intensity analysis: results of the ADVISE (ADenosine Vasodilator Independent Stenosis Evaluation) study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2012; 59(15): 1392–1402.

30. Sen S, Asrress KN, Nijjer S et al. Diagnostic classification of the instantaneous wave-free ratio is equivalent to fractional flow reserve and is not improved with adenosine administration. Results of CLARIFY (Classification Accuracy of Pressure-Only Ratios Against Indices Using Flow Study). J Am Coll Cardiol 2013; 61(13): 1409–1420.

31. Petraco R, Al-Lamee R, Gotberg M et al. Real-time use of instantaneous wave–free ratio: Results of the ADVISE in-practice: An international, multicenter evaluation of instantaneous wave-free ratio in clinical practice. Am Heart J 2014; 168(5): 739–748.

32. PijlsNH, Sels JW. Functional measurement of coronary stenosis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2012; 59(12): 1045–1057.