Association of the lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio, mean diameter of coronary arteries, and uric acid level with coronary slow flow in isolated coronary artery ectasia

Cut-off value for interleukin-34 as an additional potential inflammatory biomarker for estimation of slow coronary flow risk

BACKGROUND

Inflammatory markers may provide insights into the underlying mechanisms of slow coronary flow (SCF), including subclinical atherosclerosis and endothelial dysfunction. Interleukin-34 (IL-34), known for its role in immuno-inflammatory diseases, might hold significance in SCF. We aimed to explore the potential association between IL-34 and SCF in patients undergoing diagnostic elective coronary angiography.

METHODS

This observational, cross-sectional study enrolled 256 participants: 124 with SCF and 132 with normal coronary flow (NCF). All participants had undergone outpatient coronary angiography for suspected coronary artery disease. SCF assessment employed the TIMI frame count (TFC) for quantifying coronary flow rate.

RESULTS

SCF patients exhibited significantly elevated TFC in all three major coronary arteries compared to controls (p < 0.05). IL-34 displayed a noteworthy positive correlation with average TFC [for all participants: r = 0.514, p < 0.001; for SCF patients: r = 0.526, p < 0.001; for normal controls: r = -0.288, p > 0.05]. Similarly, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) showed a significant and positive relationship with average TFC [for all participants: r = 0.504, p < 0.001; for SCF patients: r = 0.558, p < 0.001; for normal controls: r = -0.148, p > 0.05]. SCF patients presented coronary arteries of larger size compared to controls.

CONCLUSION

Mean coronary diameter and IL-34 emerged as independent predictors of SCF. Additionally, hsCRP, mean coronary diameter, and IL-34 exhibited a positive correlation with mean TFC values. IL-34 appears to be a more effective indicator than hsCRP in SCF patients.

Coronary slow flow research: a bibliometric analysis

BACKGROUND

Studies on coronary slow flow are receiving increasing attention, but objective evaluations are still lacking. The purpose of this study was to visualize the current status and research hotspots of coronary slow flow through bibliometric analysis.

METHODS

All relevant publications on coronary slow flow from 2003 to 2022 were extracted from the Web of Science Core Collection database and analyzed by VOSviewer and CiteSpace visualization software. Year of publication, journal, country/region, institution, and first author of each paper, as well as research hotspots were identified.

RESULTS

A total of 913 publications were retrieved. The journal with the most publications was Coronary Artery Disease. The country/region with the most publications was Turkey, followed by China and the United States. The institution with the largest publication volume was Turkey Specialized Higher Education Research Hospital. The author with the largest publication volume was Chun-Yan Ma from China. Keyword analysis indicated that "treatment and prognosis", "pathogenesis and risk factors" and "diagnosis" were the clustering centers of coronary slow flow, and the research hotspots gradually changed with time, from pathogenesis to treatment and prognosis.

CONCLUSION

Future research will focus on the search for effective and non-invasive detection indicators and treatments of coronary slow flow. Collaboration needs to be enhanced between different institutions or countries/regions, which would improve clinical outcomes for patients with coronary slow flow.

The Systemic Immune-Inflammation Index May Predict the Coronary Slow Flow Better Than High-Sensitivity C-Reactive Protein in Patients Undergoing Elective Coronary Angiography

Methods

A total of 197 patients (102 patients with CSF; 95 patients with normal coronary flow) were included in this retrospective study. Clinical and angiographic characteristics of patients were obtained from hospital records.

Results

Patients with CSF had higher SII, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelet-to-lymphocyte (PLR), and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) levels compared with the control group. Body mass index (p=0.022, OR 1.151, 95% CI 1.121–1.299), low-density lipoprotein (p=0.018, OR 1.028, 95% CI 1.005–1.052), hsCRP (p=0.044, OR 1.161, 95% CI 1.004–1.343), and SII (p < 0.001, OR 1.015, 95% CI 1.003–1.026) were independent predictors of CSF in the multivariable analysis. The optimal cutoff value of SII in predicting CSF was >877 in ROC curve analysis (p < 0.001, AUC = 0.892, 95% CI 0.848–0.936). This cutoff value of SII predicted the CSF with a sensitivity of 71.5% and specificity of 92.4%. Spearman correlation analysis showed a positive correlation between the mean TFC value and PLR, NLR, hsCRP, and SII.

Conclusions

SII may be used as a better indicator for the prediction of CSF than hsCRP.

Five-years' prognostic analysis for coronary artery ectasia patients with coronary atherosclerosis: A retrospective cohort study

Background

Most of coronary artery ectasia (CAE) patients have comorbid coronary atherosclerosis. It was lack of prognostic data for CAE patients with coronary heart disease (CHD) and for whom with acute myocardial infarction (AMI).

Objective

To determine the overall prognosis for CAE patients.

Materials and methods

This study was a retrospective cohort study. Fifty-one patients with CAE and comorbid AMI (CAE + AMI) and 108 patients with CAE and comorbid CHD (CAE + CHD) were enrolled and matched to non-CAE subjects at a ratio of 1:3 using a propensity score method, respectively. Controls for CAE + AMI group were 153 AMI patients, controls for CAE group were 324 CHD patients and 329 participants with relatively normal coronary arteries (CON). We followed them up to observe major cardiovascular events (MACE).

Results

The Kaplan-Meier curves showed that the prognosis in CAE + AMI group was worse than in AMI group (5-year non-MACE rate: 62.70% vs. 79.70%, P = 0.010), the prognosis in CAE group was worse than in CHD and CON groups (5-year non-MACE rate: 74.10% vs. 85.80% and 96.70%, respectively, P = 0.000). The main MACEs in CAE + AMI and CAE groups were AMI reoccurrence (19.61% vs. 4.57%, P = 0.002) and re-hospitalization due to repeated angina pectoris (14.81% vs. 8.33% and 2.74%, P = 0.000), respectively. Additionally, the COX regression analysis revealed that the protective factors for preventing MACE in CAE + AMI group included antiplatelet agents (hazard ratio = 0.234, P = 0.016) and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor inhibitor (ACEI/ARB, hazard ratio = 0.317, P = 0.037). Whereas the main factor promoting MACE in CAE group was the degree of coronary stenosis (Gensini score, hazard ratio = 1.011, P = 0.022).

Conclusion

The prognosis of patients with CAE + AMI was worse than that of those with AMI. The overall prognosis of patients with CAE was worse than that of those with CHD. CAE + AMI and CAE groups had different characteristics; the former was prone to AMI reoccurrence, and the latter was prone to repeated angina pectoris. To prevent MACE, medications, including antiplatelets and ACEI/ARBs, are indicated for patients with CAE + AMI, whereas prevention of the progression of atherosclerotic lesions is indicated for patients with CAE.

Coronary Artery Ectasia in the Pathophysiology of Myocardial Infarction With Nonobstructive Coronary Arteries

Coronary artery ectasia (CAE) is associated with an increased risk for acute myocardial infarction (AMI). A significant proportion of patients with AMI have no obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD), however, the underlying mechanism of myocardial infarction with nonobstructive coronary arteries (MINOCA) is poorly understood. Therefore, the present study aimed to investigate whether CAE has a role in the pathogenesis of MINOCA. A total of 1,284 patients who were admitted with a diagnosis of non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction were included in the study. Patients were divided into 2 groups according to the presence or absence of obstructive CAD (≥50% stenosis). Patients without obstructive CAD (MINOCA group) and patients with obstructive CAD (no-MINOCA group) were compared regarding the frequency of CAE. Additionally, the association between CAE and MINOCA was investigated. In the study participants, 101 patients (7.9%) were diagnosed with MINOCA, whereas 1,183 (92.1%) had AMI with obstructive CAD. Importantly, the frequency of patients with CAE was significantly higher in patients with MINOCA compared with those with obstructive CAD (22.8% vs 3.5%, p <0.001). Moreover, CAE was observed in 64 patients (4.9%). The frequency of MINOCA was found to be significantly higher in patients with CAE compared with patients without CAE (35.9% vs 6.4%, p <0.001). Furthermore, multivariate analysis demonstrated that the presence of CAE was an independent predictor of MINOCA in patients presented with a diagnosis of non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (odds ratio 1.812, 95% confidence interval 1.376 to 2.581, p <0.001). In conclusion, CAE may be considered as a risk factor for MINOCA and may have a role in the pathophysiology of MINOCA.