错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Evaluation and clinical applicability of angiography-derived assessment of coronary microcirculatory resistance: a [15O]H2O PET study

  • Ruurt A. Jukema,
  • Pieter G. Raijmakers,
  • Masahiro Hoshino,
  • Roel S. Driessen,
  • Pepijn A. van Diemen,
  • Juhani Knuuti,
  • Teemu Maaniitty,
  • Jos Twisk,
  • Rolf A. Kooistra,
  • Janny Timmer,
  • Johan H.C. Reiber,
  • Pim van der Harst,
  • Maarten J. Cramer,
  • Tim van der Hoef,
  • Paul Knaapen,
  • Ibrahim Danad

摘要

The introduction of wire-free microcirculatory resistance index from functional angiography (angio-IMR) promises swift detection of coronary microvascular dysfunction, however it has not been properly validated. We sought to validate angio-IMR against invasive IMR and PET derived microvascular resistance (MVR). Moreover, we studied if angio-IMR could aid in the detection of ischemia with non-obstructive coronary arteries (INOCA). In this investigator-initiated study symptomatic patients underwent [15O]H2O positron emission tomography (PET) and invasive angiography with 3-vessel fractional flow reserve (FFR). Invasive IMR was measured in 40 patients. Angio-IMR and QFR were computed retrospectively. MVR was defined as the ratio of mean distal coronary pressure to PET derived coronary flow. PET and QFR/angio-IMR analyses were performed by blinded core labs. The right coronary artery was excluded. A total of 211 patients (mean age 61 ± 9, 148 (70%) male) with 312 vessels with successful angio-IMR analyses were included. Angio-IMR correlated moderately with invasive IMR (r = 0.48, p < 0.01), whereas no correlation was found between angio-IMR and MVR (r=-0.07, p = 0.25). Angio-IMR did not differ for vessels without obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) (FFR-) but with reduced stress perfusion (PET+) compared to vessels without obstructive CAD (FFR-) with normal stress perfusion (PET-) (median 28.19 IQR 20.42–38.99 vs. 31.67 IQR 23.47–40.63, p = 0.40). Angio-IMR correlated moderately with invasively measured IMR, whereas angio-IMR did not correlate with PET derived MVR. Moreover, angio-IMR did not reliably identify patients with INOCA.

Graphical Abstract