Abstract
Introduction: The use of physiologically guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has been demonstrated to be superior to traditional angiographically guided intervention for both clinical outcomes and economic impact based on the data of the FAME study (Fractional Flow Reserve Versus Angiography for Multivessel Evaluation) [1]. The 1-year outcome of using fractional flow reserve (FFR) to guide coronary intervention in multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD) patients demonstrated reduced end points of myocardial infarction (MI) both early and late as well as the combined end point of death/ MI. Further examination of the FAME data set over 2 years continues to demonstrate significant clinical impact for the routine measurement of FFR in this setting [2]. Fearon et al. now report the economic impact of routine measurement of FFR in patients undergoing multivessel PCI. These findings have important implications for the future practice of coronary intervention. Aims: The aim of this study was to evaluate the economic impact of routine measurement of FFR in patients undergoing multivessel PCI.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
