Feature | February 10, 2010| Habib Samady, M.D.

FFR Draws Increased Interest in the Wake of FAME Study

These results are turning heads and changing minds in the cardiology world.

St. Jude Medicals PressureWire Aeris provides wireless integration of FFR data directly into the GE Healthcare Mac-Lab hemodynamic recording system.

Editor’s note: Dr. Samady is an associate professor of medicine, division of cardiology,
Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta. He wrote the following commentary on his experience with FFR and its impact on patient care.

Since the results of the FAME study were published in January 2009, cardiologists have begun warming up to fractional flow reserve (FFR) as a diagnostic tool. The data presented from FAME (FFR vs. Angiography for Multivessel Evaluation) , compared the outcomes of 1,005 patients 12 months after percutaneous intervention for multivessel coronary artery disease based on either FFR measurement or angiography alone.

The FAME data demonstrates improved clinical and cost-effectiveness outcomes for the patient group that underwent FFR. The FFR method correlated with a 30 percent reduction in major adverse cardiac events after one year — and it lowered the per-patient cost of PCI by an average of $675 without lengthening the procedure.

These results are turning heads and changing minds in the cardiology world. Many doctors who once shied away from FFR, including some fellows and colleagues at Emory, are now starting to ask questions about the technique. As this increased interest leads to increased use, more cardiologists are recognizing the value of FFR as a tool for evaluating the functional severity of coronary stenosis prior to PCI.

FFR involves inserting a coronary pressure guidewire into an artery to measure blood flow, which allows physicians to determine whether any apparent narrowing is severe enough to merit angioplasty or stenting.

Using FFR as a diagnostic guide, interventional cardiologists can identify and stent lesions that fail to pass a blood-flow threshold, instead of stenting lesions based on angiographic characteristics. FAME shows that FFR allows for better use of stents in patients with clogged arteries, which leads to improved
outcomes. As early adopters and longtime advocates of FFR — the technique has been a part of our diagnostic toolkit. It is fair to say that the findings of the FAME study reflect what previous smaller, non-randomized studies had suggested as well as our clinical experience here at Emory.

The FFR method allows us to plan a course of treatment that is better suited to the severity of a patient’s particular condition. In general, FFR lets cardiologists fine-tune their treatment of heart-disease patients and push the whole pendulum of cardiac care more toward the conservative side — with emphasis on more intense medical therapy.

Occasionally, a patient referred for bypass surgery based on angiography alone, will undergo percutaneous intervention or medical therapy when their condition is evaluated using FFR.

FFR also correlates with a significant reduction in the number of multivessel PCIs performed in our practice. Patients who would have had stents implanted in three vessels based on angiography might end up receiving in only one or two after FFR-guided analysis. Among patients with single-vessel disease, FFR might lead us to recommend medical treatment for cases that would have otherwise received stents.

Since stents comprise the largest cost of cardiac intervention — each stent costs about $2,000 on average — FFR can significantly reduce the cost of care as it lowers the number of stents implanted and the amount of contrast dye used. But the FFR method isn’t meant to simply reduce the number of stents implanted. Stenting is a very valuable and effective procedure in cardiac care, but it is not a silver bullet.
About 30 to 40 percent of FFR procedures identify dangerous arterial narrowings that would have been missed in an angiogram, despite seriously restricting blood flow. When this happens, we will stent or even bypass areas that would have otherwise gone untreated if only angiography had been used to evaluate these patients. The cost of care increases as a result, but our patients receive treatment better tailored to their conditions.

The FAME study found that patients whose treatment was guided by FFR analysis spent less time in the hospital and experienced fewer major adverse cardiac events. All together, the benefits of FFR saved an average of $675 on each patient’s care. Some of the money saved needs to be spent on the coronary pressure guidewire, but that cost is only a fraction of the overall savings.

I used to hear physicians balk at the prospect of adopting FFR, arguing that the coronary pressure guidewire cost too much or that the procedure took too long compared to traditional treatments. The results of the FAME study appeared to have mitigated these complaints significantly.

We have the largest fellowship program in the country at Emory, so our fellows are often a very good barometer of how cardiologists nationwide are reacting to a new development in the field. Since the results of the FAME study came out, more of my experienced colleagues as well as our fellows have started to appreciate the advantages that this technique offers over angiography.

The FAME results have strengthened cardiologists’ interest in FFR by showing how the pressure wire method can improve patient care while cutting costs. It is good for the patient and for the cath lab. It is time for cardiologists to take a closer look at this physiologic technique.

Related Content

Videos | Stents Bifurcation| November 15, 2017
Philippe Genereux, M.D., co-director of the structural heart program at the Gagnon Cardiovascular Institute at Morris
Videos | TCT| November 15, 2017
DAIC Editor Dave Fornell shows some of the innovations displayed on the expo floor at the 2017 Transcatheter Cardiova
Videos | FFR Technologies| November 15, 2017
A discussion with William Fearon, M.D.
News | Stents| November 10, 2017
Cordis, a Cardinal Health company, recently unveiled a comprehensive interventional cardiology portfolio, which now...
GE Healthcare and Medis Collaborate to Expand Availability of Quantitative Flow Ratio Software
News | FFR Technologies| November 10, 2017
GE Healthcare and Dutch-based cardiovascular imaging software provider Medis announced at the 2017 Transcatheter...
The Xience Sierra stent.
Technology | Stents Drug Eluting| November 09, 2017
November 9, 2017 — Abbott received European CE mark for Xience Sierra, the newest generation of the company's Xience
OCT comparison between the Combo vs. Xience stents in the HARMONEE study.

OCT comparison between the Combo vs. Xience stents in the HARMONEE study.

Feature | Stents| November 08, 2017
November 8, 2017 – New results from the HARMONEE Japan/U.S.
FAVOR II Studies Examine Diagnostic Accuracy of Quantitative Flow Ratio, FFR-Angio.
News | FFR Technologies| November 08, 2017
Investigators in the FAVOR II China and FAVOR II Europe-Japan studies recently presented their results at the 2017...
Videos | Stents Bioresorbable| November 07, 2017
A discussion with Ajay Kirtane, M.D., SM, director of the cardiac catheterization laboratories at New York-Presbyteri
Six Months of DAPT Non-Inferior to Twelve in STEMI Patients Receiving Drug-Eluting Stents
News | Antiplatelet and Anticoagulation Therapies| November 06, 2017
November 6, 2017 —  The first trial to evaluate the safety of...
Overlay Init