Learn · Part 2. The tests · 5 min read
Invasive coronary angiography and physiology
What angiography, FFR and iFR show, how the guidelines place it after noninvasive testing, and why a normal angiogram does not rule out microvascular disease.
60-second take
- Angiography shows where and how severe a narrowing is. Pressure-wire FFR or iFR adds whether the narrowing limits flow.
- The guidelines mostly frame it as the step that guides treatment, for example when symptoms persist despite medical therapy or stress testing shows moderate to severe ischemia, not as a routine risk test.
- It carries procedural risk and radiation, averaging 4 to 10 mSv for an interventional procedure.
- A normal angiogram does not exclude coronary vascular dysfunction, because the small vessels that regulate flow are too small to see.
What it is and how it works
Invasive coronary angiography (ICA) uses a catheter placed in the coronary arteries, contrast dye and X-ray imaging. It defines whether an epicardial coronary artery has a luminal obstruction, and how severe it is, where it sits, how long it is and how wide the vessel is, along with coronary blood flow. Its main goal is to detect and characterize high-grade stenoses so the team can judge whether percutaneous or surgical revascularization is feasible and needed .
A pressure wire adds physiology. Fractional flow reserve (FFR) is the ratio of pressure beyond a stenosis to aortic pressure during maximal hyperemia, which estimates the ratio of flow. The instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) is a non-hyperemic alternative, simpler to use and clinically non-inferior in practice . The chest pain guideline links revascularization for lesion-specific ischemia (FFR of 0.80 or less, or iFR of 0.89 or less) to better event-free survival than treating by anatomy alone . The same catheter lab can also offer intravascular imaging, testing for coronary spasm and microvascular disease, and other hemodynamic measurements .
What the result tells you
The AUC sort angiography results by the worst stenosis, as in the angiography categories below .
| Category | Maximal diameter stenosis |
|---|---|
| Mild or none | 0% to 39% |
| Intermediate | 40% to 69% |
| Obstructive | 70% or more, or left main 50% or more |
Anatomy alone is an imperfect guide to ischemia. In the SCCT consensus, compared with invasive FFR of 0.80 or less, the sensitivity of angiographic stenosis was 69% and the specificity 67%. For an equivocal angiogram, the AUC assume physiological testing (FFR or non-hyperemic indices), noninvasive stress testing, or intravascular ultrasound for the left main. Physiology values are continuous, from 0 to 1, and should not be read only as above or below a cutoff .
Many angiograms show no obstructive disease. Nonobstructive CAD is present in more than half of patients undergoing elective angiography and carries an increased risk of death and MI . The chest pain guideline notes that current testing patterns result in a normal angiography rate of upward of 50% to 60% .
The microvascular catch
Angiography has a spatial resolution of about 0.3 mm, so it cannot show the 0.1 mm arterioles that regulate blood flow to the muscle. A normal angiogram therefore does not exclude abnormal coronary vascular function, which can be tested during the same procedure, including coronary microcirculation and vasomotion . Ischemia with nonobstructive coronary arteries (INOCA) covers microvascular dysfunction, spasm, or both . In the CorMicA trial, treatment guided by invasive physiology (flow reserve, microvascular resistance, FFR, then acetylcholine testing) improved angina and quality of life at 6 months, with no difference in major adverse events . See also the definition of coronary microvascular dysfunction.
Strengths and limitations
Strengths
- Detects both nonobstructive and obstructive plaque, and can add physiology, intravascular imaging, and spasm and microvascular testing in one procedure .
- Defines location, length and diameter of a lesion, which is what a revascularization decision needs .
Limitations
- Procedural complications and radiation exposure . Radiation during an interventional procedure averages 4 to 10 mSv, depending on duration and complexity .
- Cannot show the arterioles that regulate muscle blood flow .
- Pressure-wire physiology is underused: only 18.5% of intermediate stenoses undergo routine invasive FFR, rising to 75% among lesions that proceed to PCI .
Practical points
- A test, or the first step of treatment? Angiography can answer a diagnostic question, but the guidelines mainly frame it as the step that guides treatment. For patients with chronic coronary disease, ICA is recommended when a change in symptoms or functional capacity persists despite guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT), to guide therapy aimed at improving angina . It is also recommended for newly reduced LV function or heart failure, and not routinely recommended for risk stratification alone without LV dysfunction, heart failure, refractory chest pain, or noninvasive testing suggesting significant left main disease .
- After noninvasive testing. In patients with obstructive CAD and stable chest pain despite GDMT, ICA is recommended when stress testing shows moderate to severe ischemia. It is also effective for guiding therapy when CCTA shows left main stenosis of 50% or more, obstructive CAD with FFR-CT of 0.80 or less, or severe stenosis in all three main vessels. If a patient goes to ICA without prior stress testing, FFR or iFR is of benefit . SCCT likewise says left main stenosis of 50% or more and severe triple-vessel disease should go to ICA .
- Without known CAD. The chest pain guideline notes that, unlike older guidelines, contemporary randomized trials support safely triaging candidates for elective angiography with CCTA or noninvasive stress testing .
- Symptoms versus outcomes. In ISCHEMIA, an invasive strategy did not change the primary composite outcome over about 3.3 years in stable CAD with moderate to severe ischemia, but angina improved more, particularly in patients with more frequent angina at baseline .
- Risks. The AUC name procedural complications and radiation, and list sensitivity to iodinated contrast among the inherent risks of testing . The sources used here give no complication rates. In pregnancy, imaging with ionizing radiation should generally be avoided, and when it is necessary the risks and benefits of invasive angiography should be discussed with the patient .
- Reading the report. Look for the worst stenosis in each major vessel and the left main, whether FFR or iFR was measured for intermediate lesions, and, if the arteries look open, whether coronary function testing was done.
In the 2026 consensus, an FFR of 0.75 or less has the highest correlation with abnormal ischemic testing, and below about 0.67 revascularization may start to give greater benefit than medical therapy. In practice 0.80 or less is used to suggest benefit from revascularization. Trials that compared comprehensive pressure-wire assessment of all major vessels with angiography alone (the document names FAME-3, RIPCORD 2 and FUTURES) did not show a reduction in hard endpoints but did show fewer downstream tests and repeat hospital visits .
Invasive coronary function testing uses cutoffs such as a thermodilution coronary flow reserve under 2.0 and an index of microcirculatory resistance of 25 or more, along with acetylcholine testing for microvascular constriction and epicardial spasm . For persistent stable chest pain with nonobstructive CAD and at least mild ischemia on imaging, the chest pain guideline says it is reasonable to consider invasive coronary function testing .
Noninvasive routes to the same question exist: stress PET with myocardial blood flow reserve, or stress CMR with flow reserve, are described as reasonable in persistent chest pain with nonobstructive CAD.
An example from the tool
Angiography is often considered after a noninvasive test has shown significant ischemia. Open the scenario below to see how the criteria rate each test, and why.
Example from the tool
Moderate to severe ischemia on stress imaging
- Exercise ECGRarely Appropriate
- Exercise SPECTRarely Appropriate
- Pharmacologic SPECTRarely Appropriate
- Pharmacologic PETRarely Appropriate
- Exercise echoRarely Appropriate
- Dobutamine echoRarely Appropriate
- Stress CMRRarely Appropriate
- CAC scoreRarely Appropriate
- CCTAAppropriate
- Invasive angiographyAppropriate
- No testMay Be Appropriate
The tool also covers what comes after angiography. For the case where angiography shows mild or no CAD, or normal invasive physiology, open scenario 38 →.
Try the scenario builder → for patient-specific questions.
Try it in the tool
Sources cited on this page
Click a tag for the full reference. All references