The results from the most recent poll from the Invasive Cardiovascular Angiography and Intervention Clinical Topic Collection are provided below. Response was low, but there are a few interesting points that seem consistent with my expectations. With wide variation, there seems to be use of fractional flow reserve (FFR) or comparable techniques in half of cases; in the half in which FFR was utilized, the results influenced decision-making regarding the need for intervention of a specific lesion. The question is how often it is necessary to perform to "get the right answer." The vote says it's needed half the time and changes therapy half the time. Lesion assessment of severity has an important role in late outcomes. The responses to how often FFR is used and if it influences treatment are not consistent. The major unanswered question is this: How often would FFR change decisions in the circumstances it is deemed "unnecessary" by the respondents? Comments are welcome. Thanks to all who participated.

Keywords: Coronary Stenosis, Stents, Hemodynamics, Coronary Angiography

< Back to Listings