Recent controversy regarding the accuracy of CT-FFR. The truth is out there

CT Fractional Flow Reserve: A Practical Guide to Application, Interpretation, and Problem Solving

CT fractional flow reserve (FFR_CT) is a physiologic simulation technique that models coronary flow from routine coronary CT angiography (CTA). To evaluate lesion-specific ischemia, FFR_CT is measured 2 cm distal to a stenotic lesion. FFR_CT greater than 0.8 is normal, 0.76-0.8 is borderline, and 0.75 or less is abnormal. FFR_CT should always be interpreted in correlation with clinical and anatomic coronary CTA findings. FFR_CT increases the specificity of coronary CTA in the evaluation of coronary artery disease, decreases the prevalence of nonobstructive disease in invasive coronary angiography (ICA), and helps with revascularization decisions and planning. Patients with intermediate-risk coronary anatomy at CTA and abnormal FFR_CT can undergo ICA and revascularization, whereas those with normal FFR_CT can be safely deferred from ICA. In borderline FFR_CT values, management is decided in the context of the clinical scenario, but many cases could be safely managed with medical treatment. There are some limitations and pitfalls of FFR_CT. Abnormal FFR_CT values can be seen in mild stenosis, and normal FFR_CTvalues can be seen in severe stenosis. Gradually decreasing or abnormal low FFR_CT values at the distal vessel without a proximal focal lesion could be due to diffuse atherosclerosis. Coronary stents, bypass grafts, coronary anomalies, coronary dissection, transcatheter aortic valve replacement, unstable angina, and acute or recent myocardial infarction are situations in which FFR_CT has not been validated and should not be used at this time. The authors provide a practical guide to the applications and interpretation of FFR_CT, focusing on common pitfalls and challenges. Online supplemental material is available for this article. ^©RSNA, 2022.

Prognostic value of coronary computed tomography angiographic derived fractional flow reserve: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Objectives

To obtain more powerful assessment of the prognostic value of fractional flow reserve_CT testing we performed a systematic literature review and collaborative meta-analysis of studies that assessed clinical outcomes of CT-derived calculation of FFR (FFR_CT) (HeartFlow) analysis in patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD).

Methods

We searched PubMed and Web of Science electronic databases for published studies that evaluated clinical outcomes following fractional flow reserve_CT testing between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2020. The primary endpoint was defined as ‘all-cause mortality (ACM) or myocardial infarction (MI)’ at 12-month follow-up. Exploratory analyses were performed using major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs, ACM+MI+unplanned revascularisation), ACM, MI, spontaneous MI or unplanned (>3 months) revascularisation as the endpoint.

Results

Five studies were identified including a total of 5460 patients eligible for meta-analyses. The primary endpoint occurred in 60 (1.1%) patients, 0.6% (13/2126) with FFR_CT>0.80% and 1.4% (47/3334) with FFR_CT ≤0.80 (relative risk (RR) 2.31 (95% CI 1.29 to 4.13), p=0.005). Likewise, MACE, MI, spontaneous MI or unplanned revascularisation occurred more frequently in patients with FFR_CT ≤0.80 versus patients with FFR_CT >0.80. Each 0.10-unit FFR_CT reduction was associated with a greater risk of the primary endpoint (RR 1.67 (95% CI 1.47 to 1.87), p<0.001).

Conclusions

The 12-month outcomes in patients with stable CAD show low rates of events in those with a negative FFR_CT result, and lower risk of an unfavourable outcome in patients with a negative test result compared with patients with a positive test result. Moreover, the FFR_CT numerical value was inversely associated with outcomes.