- 【Updated on May 12, 2025】 Integration of CiNii Dissertations and CiNii Books into CiNii Research
- Trial version of CiNii Research Knowledge Graph Search feature is available on CiNii Labs
- 【Updated on June 30, 2025】Suspension and deletion of data provided by Nikkei BP
- Regarding the recording of “Research Data” and “Evidence Data”
FFR and iFR
-
- Matsuo Hitoshi
- The Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Gifu Heart Center
-
- Kawase Yoshiaki
- The Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Gifu Heart Center
-
- Kawamura Itta
- The Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Gifu Heart Center
Bibliographic Information
- Other Title
-
- FFR and iFR : Similarities, Differences, and Clinical Implication
- Similarities, Differences, and Clinical Implication
Search this article
Description
Fractional flow reserve (FFR) is now accepted as the reference standard to indicate whether a stenosis is likely to be responsible for ischemia. It is generally accepted that a stenosis with an ischemic value of FFR is responsible for symptom and a worse outcome and should be revascularized, whereas lesions with a non-ischemic FFR have a more favorable prognosis and can be treated medically. Furthermore, FFR-guided revascularization strategy has been definitely proven to be better than angiography-guided strategy in pivotal landmark studies. Instantaneous wave free ratio (iFR) is another physiological index which can be obtained at rest without hyperemic stimulation. iFR is conceptually different from FFR, leading to lively scientific debate about this index. In this review article, the concept, differences and similarities of FFR and iFR are reviewed.
Journal
-
- Annals of Nuclear Cardiology
-
Annals of Nuclear Cardiology 3 (1), 53-60, 2017
Japanese Society of Nuclear Cardiology