I n the universe of ischemic stress testing and coronary physiological measurements (Figure 1), fractional flow reserve (FFR) emerged as a simple, practical, and validated ischemic index with proven value in daily practice. FFR has, over the years, been compared with other physiological indices, and, depending on the statistical method, these comparisons seemed to indicate either diagnostic equivalency or high agreement among resting pressure indices and to some degree hyperemic flow (coronary flow reserve [CFR] and hyperemic stenosis resistance [HSR]). More recently, outcomes with instantaneous wave-free pressure ratio (iFR) were found to be noninferior to those of FFR in the DEFINE-FLAIR (Functional Lesion Assessment of Intermediate Stenosis to Guide Revascularisation) and iFRSWEDEHEART (Evaluation of iFR vs FFR in Stable Angina or Acute Coronary Syndrome) studies (1,2).

中文翻译：

---

静息冠状动脉生理指标的一致性和差异

在缺血性压力测试和冠状动脉生理测量领域（图 1），血流储备分数 (FFR) 成为一种简单、实用且经过验证的缺血指数，在日常实践中具有证明的价值。多年来，FFR 一直与其他生理指标进行比较，并且根据统计方法，这些比较似乎表明静息压力指标之间的诊断等效性或高度一致，并且在某种程度上表明充血流量（冠状动脉血流储备 [CFR]和充血性狭窄抵抗 [HSR]）。最近，