|
|
November
25,
2009 -- 6:15pm EST
Fractional Flow Reserve (FFR) Recognized in Guidelines,
Not So Much In Reimbursement
When
I heard Dr. Nico Pijls first present data from the FAME study during
a press conference at the 2008 TCT,
I was struck by the similarity of
the concept to what Andreas Gruentzig, inventor of coronary angioplasty,
was doing in the early days of balloons: measuring intra-arterial
pressures to discern what exactly was going on inside the coronaries
during these procedures. I brought this up
with Dr. Pijls and he agreed. I've detailed
this whole thread back in my January post titled, "FAME:
Back to the Future".
So FAME and the value of Fractional Flow Reserve (FFR)
have now found
their way into the official PCI guidelines. Last week, the ACC/AHA/SCAI
issued their first Focused Updates -- a way of responding more
quickly to recent and important
clinical and research information (guidelines
normally are only issued every two to three years) -- and FFR was
included as "useful to determine whether PCI
of a specific coronary lesion is warranted."
The two manufacturers of FFR catheters, Volcano and St.
Jude, feel that functional measurement (FM) is going to be a rapidly
growing field.
With the upgrade in the Focused Guidelines this may be so. But, as
usual, reimbursement is lagging behind. Interventional cardiologists
may see the scientific evidence that FFR improves outcomes but, if
there isn't sufficient reimbursement for its use, they will be less
inclined to use it.
Augusto Pichard, MD of Washington Hospital Center told me he doesn't have
this problem because he did an analysis of how much
money was saved by using this technology and his hospital "got
it".
And, as William
F. Fearon, MD of Stanford University Medical
Center observed, "Use of FFR technology represents a rare opportunity
in medicine in which an innovative product not only improves clinical
outcomes but also saves money."
Lower costs and a third less heart attacks and deaths. FFR should be
in every cath lab, right? Yet currently penetration of this technology
in the U.S. is only 5%. Comments?
|
|
|