[Comment] Achieve more with less metal in PCI: angiography-derived FFR, intravascular ultrasound, or both?
A decade after the first introduction of angiography-derived fractional flow reserve (FFR), we are now entering an era in which simplified image-derived solutions could replace invasive assessment tools for evaluating coronary lesions. Key advances in the ever-improving contour detection and computational fluid dynamics have enabled angiography-derived FFR to be extensively validated against wire-based FFR in intermediate stenosis (40–90%).1 Angiography-derived FFR offers a non-invasive alternative that reduces wire-related complications, is more logistically feasible, and can be performed repeatedly to optimise percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).
A decade after the first introduction of angiography-derived fractional flow reserve (FFR), we are now entering an era in which simplified image-derived solutions could replace invasive assessment tools for evaluating coronary lesions. Key advances in the ever-improving contour detection and computational fluid dynamics have enabled angiography-derived FFR to be extensively validated against wire-based FFR in intermediate stenosis (40–90%).1 Angiography-derived FFR offers a non-invasive alternative that reduces wire-related complications, is more logistically feasible, and can be performed repeatedly to optimise percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).
