Resistive reserve ratio and microvascular resistance reserve in patients with coronary vasospastic angina

Relation of Vasoreactivity in the Left and Right Coronary Arteries During Acetylcholine Spasm Provocation Testing

The diagnosis of vasospastic angina (VSA) according to Japanese guidelines involves an initial intracoronary acetylcholine (ACh) provocation test in the left coronary artery (LCA) followed by testing in the right coronary artery (RCA). However, global variations in test protocols often lead to the omission of ACh provocation in the RCA, potentially resulting in the underdiagnosis of VSA. This study assessed the validity of the LCA-only ACh provocation approach for the VSA diagnosis and whether vasoreactivity in the LCA aids in determining further provocation in the RCA. A total of 273 patients who underwent sequential intracoronary ACh provocation testing in the LCA and RCA were included. Patients with a positive ACh provocation test in the LCA were excluded. Relations between vasoreactivity in the LCA and ACh test outcomes (positivity and adverse events) in the RCA were evaluated. In patients with negative ACh test results in the LCA, subsequent ACh testing was positive in the RCA in 23 of 273 (8.4%) patients. In patients with minimal LCA vasoconstriction (<25%), only 3.0% had a positive ACh test in the RCA, whereas the ACh test in the RCA was positive in 13.5% of those with LCA constriction of 25% to 90% (p = 0.002). No major adverse events occurred during ACh testing in the RCA. In conclusion, for the VSA diagnosis, the omission of ACh provocation in the RCA may be clinically acceptable, particularly when vasoconstriction induced by ACh injection was minimal in the LCA. Further studies are needed to define ACh provocation protocols worldwide.

Relation of Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction Frame Count to Invasively Measured Coronary Physiologic Indexes

In the international guidelines, higher thrombolysis in myocardial infarction frame count (TFC) is indicated as evidence of coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMD). However, the association of TFC with invasively measured coronary physiologic parameters such as coronary flow reserve (CFR) and index of microcirculatory resistance (IMR) remains unclear. Patients without significant epicardial coronary lesions underwent invasive coronary physiologic assessment using a thermodilution method in the left anterior descending artery. Corrected TFC (cTFC) was evaluated on coronary angiography. The cut-off values of CFR and IMR were defined as ≤2.0 and >25, and patients with abnormal CFR and/or IMR were defined as having CMD. This study aimed to assess whether cTFC >25, a cut-off value in the guidelines, was diagnostic of the presence of CMD. Of the 137 patients, 34 (24.8%) and 32 (23.3%) had cTFC >25 and CMD, respectively. The rate of CMD was not significantly different between patients with and without cTFC >25. cTFC was weakly correlated with at rest and hyperemic mean transit time and IMR, whereas no significant correlation was observed between cTFC and CFR. The receiver operating characteristic curve analysis showed the poor diagnostic ability of cTFC for abnormal CFR and IMR and the presence of CMD. In conclusion, in patients without epicardial coronary lesions, cTFC as a continuous value and with the cut-off value of 25 was not diagnostic of abnormal CFR and IMR and the presence of CMD. Our results did not support the use of cTFC in CMD evaluation.

Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction Frame Count for Coronary Blood Flow Evaluation during Interventional Diagnostic Procedures

Background and Objectives: An interventional diagnostic procedure (IDP), including intracoronary acetylcholine (ACh) provocation and coronary physiological testing, is recommended as an invasive diagnostic standard for patients suspected of ischemia with no obstructive coronary arteries (INOCA). Recent guidelines suggest Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction frame count (TFC) as an alternative to wire-based coronary physiological indices for diagnosing coronary microvascular dysfunction. We evaluated trajectories of TFC during IDP and the impact of ACh provocation on TFC. Materials and Methods: This was a single-center, retrospective study. Patients who underwent IDP to diagnose INOCA were included and divided into two groups according to the positive or negative ACh provocation test. Wire-based invasive physiological assessment was preceded by ACh provocation tests and intracoronary isosorbide dinitrate (ISDN). We evaluated TFC at three different time points during IDP; pre-ACh, post-ISDN, and post-hyperemia. Results: Of 104 patients, 58 (55.8%) had positive ACh provocation test. In the positive ACh group, resting mean transit time (Tmn) and baseline resistance index were significantly higher than in the negative ACh group. Post-ISDN TFC was significantly correlated with resting Tmn (r = 0.31, p = 0.002). Absolute TFC values were highest at pre-ACh, followed by post-ISDN and post-hyperemia in both groups. All between-time point differences in TFC were statistically significant in both groups, except for the change from pre-ACh to post-ISDN in the positive ACh group. Conclusions: In patients suspected of INOCA, TFC was modestly correlated with Tmn, a surrogate of coronary blood flow. The positive ACh provocation test influenced coronary blood flow assessment during IDP.

Impact of preceding acetylcholine provocation testing on following coronary physiological assessment during an interventional diagnostic procedure

BACKGROUND

Intracoronary acetylcholine (ACh) provocation test and coronary physiological assessment are useful interventional diagnostic procedures for evaluating ischemia with no obstructive coronary arteries (INOCA). However, the appropriate sequential order of the diagnostic procedures has been a matter of debate. We investigated the impact of preceding ACh provocation on following coronary physiological assessment.

METHODS

Patients suspected of INOCA underwent invasive coronary physiological assessment using thermodilution method and were divided into two groups according to the implementation of ACh provocation test. The ACh group was further divided into the positive and negative ACh groups. In the ACh group, intracoronary ACh provocation was performed before the invasive coronary physiological assessment. The main interest of this study was to compare coronary physiological indices among the no ACh, negative ACh, and positive ACh groups.

RESULTS

Of 120 patients, the no ACh, and negative and positive ACh groups included 46 (38.3 %), 36 (30.0 %), and 38 (31.7 %), respectively. Fractional flow reserve was lower in the no ACh group than in the ACh group. Resting mean transit time was significantly longer in the positive ACh group, followed by the no ACh and negative ACh groups (1.22 ± 0.55 vs. 1.00 ± 0.46 vs. 0.74 ± 0.36 s, p < 0.001). Index of microcirculatory resistance and coronary flow reserve did not differ significantly among the three groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Preceding ACh provocation influenced following physiological assessment, particularly when ACh test was positive. Further studies are warranted to determine which interventional diagnostic procedure, ACh provocation or physiological assessment, should be preceded in the invasive evaluation of INOCA.

Factors Associated with Impaired Resistive Reserve Ratio and Microvascular Resistance Reserve

Coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMD) is described as an important subset of ischemia with no obstructive coronary artery disease. Resistive reserve ratio (RRR) and microvascular resistance reserve (MRR) have been proposed as novel physiological indices evaluating coronary microvascular dilation function. The aim of this study was to explore factors associated with impaired RRR and MRR. Coronary physiological indices were invasively evaluated in the left anterior descending coronary artery using the thermodilution method in patients suspected of CMD. CMD was defined as a coronary flow reserve <2.0 and/or index of microcirculatory resistance ≥25. Of 117 patients, 26 (24.1%) had CMD. RRR (3.1 ± 1.9 vs. 6.2 ± 3.2, p < 0.001) and MRR (3.4 ± 1.9 vs. 6.9 ± 3.5, p < 0.001) were lower in the CMD group. In the receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, RRR (area under the curve 0.84, p < 0.001) and MRR (area under the curve 0.85, p < 0.001) were both predictive of the presence of CMD. In the multivariable analysis, previous myocardial infarction, lower hemoglobin, higher brain natriuretic peptide levels, and intracoronary nicorandil were identified as factors associated with lower RRR and MRR. In conclusion, the presence of previous myocardial infarction, anemia, and heart failure was associated with impaired coronary microvascular dilation function. RRR and MRR may be useful to identify patients with CMD.

Validation of pressure-bounded coronary flow reserve using invasive coronary physiologic assessment

Coronary flow reserve (CFR) represents entire coronary compensatory capacity. While CFR assessment is recommended to identify patients at an increased risk of cardiovascular events and coronary microvascular dysfunction, invasive CFR measurement is often technically challenging. Although not well validated yet, pressure-bounded CFR (pbCFR) has been proposed as a simple surrogate to estimate impaired CFR. In this study, we evaluated coronary physiological characteristics of low pbCFR using detailed invasive assessment. Invasive physiological assessment including resting ratio of distal coronary pressure to aortic pressure (Pd/Pa), fractional flow reserve (FFR), resting and hyperemic mean transit time, index of microcirculatory resistance (IMR), CFR, resistive reserve ratio, and microvascular resistance reserve (MRR) was performed in 107 patients in the left anterior descending coronary artery. pbCFR was calculated only with resting Pd/Pa and FFR. Patients were divided into low pbCFR and non-low pbCFR groups. Of 107 patients, 50 (46.7%) had low pbCFR. FFR (0.90 ± 0.05 vs. 0.83 ± 0.05, p < 0.001), hyperemic mean transit time (0.27 ± 0.17 vs. 0.21 ± 0.12, p = 0.04), and IMR (20.4 ± 13.2 vs. 15.0 ± 9.1, p = 0.01) were significantly higher in the low pbCFR group than their counterpart. While directly measured CFR did not differ significantly (4.4 ± 2.3 vs. 5.1 ± 2.8, p = 0.18), MRR was lower in the low pbCFR group (5.4 ± 3.0 vs. 6.8 ± 3.8, p = 0.047). The rates of CFR < 2.0 and IMR ≥ 25 were not significantly different between the 2 groups. In conclusion, although CFR did not differ significantly, IMR and MRR were impaired in patients with low pbCFR, suggesting pbCFR as a potential surrogate of coronary microvascular function in clinical practice.

Critical role of the coronary microvasculature in heart disease: From pathologic driving force to "innocent" bystander

The coronary microvasculature is responsible for providing oxygen and nutrients to myocardial tissue. A healthy microvasculature with an intact and properly functioning endothelium accomplishes this by seemless changes in vascular tone to match supply and demand. Perturbations in the normal physiology of the microvasculature, including endothelial and/or vascular smooth muscle dysfunction, result in impaired function (vasoconstriction, antithrombotic, etc.) and structural (hypertrophic, fibrotic) abnormalities that lead to microvascular ischemia and potential organ damage. While coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMD) is the primary pathologic driving force in ischemia with non-obstructive coronary artery disease (INOCA), angina with no obstructive coronary arteries (ANOCA), and myocardial infarction with non-obstructed coronary arteries (MINOCA), it may be a bystander in many cardiac disorders which later become pathologically associated with signs and/or symptoms of myocardial ischemia. Importantly, regardless of the primary or secondary basis of CMD in the heart, it is associated with important increases in morbidity and mortality. In this review we discuss salient features pertaining to known pathophysiologic mechanisms driving CMD, the spectrum of heart diseases where it places a critical role, invasive and non-invasive diagnostic testing, management strategies, and the gaps in knowledge where future research efforts are needed.