Beijk, Marcel A.M.

Abstract Background and Aims Invasive coronary function testing (CFT) identifies coronary vasomotor disorders in up to 90% of patients with angina with non-obstructive coronary arteries (ANOCA). The ILIAS ANOCA trial hypothesized that routine ad hoc CFT would be feasible, safe, and effective in providing an early, comprehensive diagnosis. Additionally, it was anticipated that combining CFT with a disease-specific treatment protocol would significantly improve quality of life in ANOCA patients compared with standard care. Methods After excluding patients with obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) during clinically indicated invasive coronary angiography (ICA), eligible patients underwent CFT and were randomized to either the standard care group, where CFT results remained blinded, or the intervention group, where CFT results were disclosed along with a tailored medical therapy protocol. The primary outcome was the mean difference in the within-subject change in Seattle Angina Questionnaire summary score (SAQSS) between groups from baseline to a follow-up of 6 months. The trial is registered with the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (NL-OMON20739). Results A total of 255 patients consented, of whom 153 patients (60%) without CAD underwent CFT and were randomized 1:1 to the standard care (n = 76) or intervention group (n = 77). All CFT procedures were successful without adverse events. A vasomotor disorder was identified in 120 patients (78%). At 6-month follow-up, the SAQSS improved significantly in the intervention group compared with the control group, with an intervention effect of 9.4 units (95% confidence interval 3.9–14.9, P = .001). There were no major adverse cardiac events at the 6-month follow-up. Conclusions Routine CFT during the initial ICA was feasible, safe, and had high diagnostic yield. Implementing a pragmatic CFT protocol combined with a disease-specific treatment protocol significantly improved disease-related quality of life in patients with ANOCA compared with standard care.

AbstractAimsWe evaluated the occurrence and physiology of respiration‐related beat‐to‐beat variations in resting Pd/Pa and FFR during intravenous adenosine administration, and its impact on clinical decision‐making.Methods and ResultsCoronary pressure tracings in rest and at plateau hyperemia were analyzed in a total of 39 stenosis from 37 patients, and respiratory rate was calculated with ECG‐derived respiration (EDR) in 26 stenoses from 26 patients. Beat‐to‐beat variations in FFR occurred in a cyclical fashion and were strongly correlated with respiratory rate (R2 = 0.757, p < 0.001). There was no correlation between respiratory rate and variations in resting Pd/Pa. When single‐beat averages were used to calculate FFR, mean ΔFFR was 0.04 ± 0.02. With averaging of FFR over three or five cardiac cycles, mean ΔFFR decreased to 0.02 ± 0.02, and 0.01 ± 0.01, respectively. Using a FFR ≤ 0.80 threshold, stenosis classification changed in 20.5% (8/39), 12.8% (5/39) and 5.1% (2/39) for single‐beat, three‐beat and five‐beat averaged FFR. The impact of respiration was more pronounced in patients with pulmonary disease (ΔFFR 0.05 ± 0.02 vs 0.03 ± 0.02, p = 0.021).ConclusionBeat‐to‐beat variations in FFR during plateau hyperemia related to respiration are common, of clinically relevant magnitude, and frequently lead FFR to cross treatment thresholds. A five‐beat averaged FFR, overcomes clinically relevant impact of FFR variation.