Fractional flow reserve for optimizing decision-making in percutaneous coronary intervention: a clinical case of multivessel coronary artery disease with intermediate stenosis

  • Interventional Cardiology Department, Republican Specialized Cardiology Scientific-Practical Medicine Center. Tashkent, Uzbekistan
  • Republican Specialized Cardiology Scientific-Practical Medicine Center. Tashkent, Uzbekistan

DOI

https://doi.org/10.47689/2181-3663-vol4-iss4-pp190-201

Keywords

fractional flow reserve (FFR) , coronary artery disease (CAD) , percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) , intermediate stenoses , multivessel disease , functional revascularization

Abstract

Fractional flow reserve (FFR) is the gold standard for the functional assessment of coronary stenoses, yet its application in clinical practice remains limited, particularly in Central Asia. This clinical case demonstrates the practical value of an FFR-guided revascularization strategy in a 70-year-old woman with multivessel coronary artery disease. Coronary angiography revealed critical stenosis of the circumflex artery (90–95%) and intermediate stenosis of the left anterior descending artery (55–60%). FFR measurements showed hemodynamic significance of the circumflex lesion (FFR 0.69) and functional insignificance of the left anterior descending lesion (FFR 0.93). Based on physiological assessment, stenting was performed only in the circumflex artery, with deferred intervention on the left anterior descending artery. The case illustrates key advantages of FFR: objective decision-making, avoidance of unnecessary stenting, reduction of procedural risks, and optimization of long-term outcomes. Integrating FFR into routine practice represents an important step toward personalized medicine in interventional cardiology.

References

Roth GA, Mensah GA, Johnson CO, et al. Global Burden of Cardiovascular Diseases and Risk Factors, 1990-2019: Update From the GBD 2019 Study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2020;76(25):2982-3021.

Neumann FJ, Sousa-Uva M, Ahlsson A, et al. 2018 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization. Eur Heart J. 2019;40(87):87-165.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Tonino PA, Fearon WF, De Bruyne B, et al. Angiographic versus functional severity of coronary artery stenoses in the FAME study fractional flow reserve versus angiography in multivessel evaluation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;55(25):2816-2821.

Xaplanteris P, Fournier S, Pijls NHJ, et al. Five-Year Outcomes with PCI Guided by Fractional Flow Reserve. N Engl J Med. 2018;379(3):250-259.

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.

Fearon WF, Bornschein B, Tonino PA, et al. Economic evaluation of fractional flow reserve-guided percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with multivessel disease. Circulation. 2010;122(24):2545-2550.

Nallamothu BK, Spertus JA, Lansky AJ, et al. Comparison of clinical interpretation with visual assessment and quantitative coronary angiography in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention in contemporary practice. Circulation. 2013;127(17):1793-1800.

van Nunen LX, Zimmermann FM, Tonino PA, 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.

Siebert U, Arvandi M, Gothe RM, et al. Improving the quality of percutaneous revascularisation in patients with multivessel disease in Australia: cost-effectiveness, public health implications, and budget impact of FFR-guided PCI. Heart Lung Circ. 2014;23(6):527-533.

Zhang J, Gao X, Kan J, et al. Intravascular Ultrasound Versus Angiography-Guided Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation: The ULTIMATE Trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018;72(24):3126-3137.

Hong SJ, Kim BK, Shin DH, et al. Effect of Intravascular Ultrasound-Guided vs Angiography-Guided Everolimus-Eluting Stent Implantation: The IVUS-XPL Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA. 2015;314(20):2155-2163.

Davies JE, Sen S, Dehbi HM, et al. Use of the Instantaneous Wave-free Ratio or Fractional Flow Reserve in PCI. N Engl J Med. 2017;376(19):1824-1834.

Nørgaard BL, Leipsic J, Gaur S, et al. Diagnostic performance of noninvasive fractional flow reserve derived from coronary computed tomography angiography in suspected coronary artery disease: the NXT trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;63(12):1145-1155.

Published

Fractional flow reserve for optimizing decision-making in percutaneous coronary intervention: a clinical case of multivessel coronary artery disease with intermediate stenosis

How to Cite

Yuldashov, A. and Fozilov, K. 2025. Fractional flow reserve for optimizing decision-making in percutaneous coronary intervention: a clinical case of multivessel coronary artery disease with intermediate stenosis. Preventive Medicine and Health. 4, 4 (Oct. 2025), 190–201. DOI:https://doi.org/10.47689/2181-3663-vol4-iss4-pp190-201.