Citations

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.

Background: The majority of randomized controlled trials of revascularization decision-making excludes left main coronary artery disease (LMD). Therefore, contemporary clinical outcomes of patients with stable coronary artery disease and LMD with proven ischemia remain poorly understood. The aim of this study was to assess the long-term clinical outcomes of physiologically significant LMD according to the treatment strategies of revascularization versus revascularization deferral. Methods: In this international multicenter registry of stable LMD interrogated with the instantaneous wave-free ratio, patients with physiologically significant ischemia (instantaneous wave-free ratio ≤0.89) were analyzed according to the coronary revascularization (n=151) versus revascularization deferral (n=74). Propensity score matching was performed to adjust for baseline clinical characteristics. The primary end point was a composite of death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization of left main stem. The secondary end points were as follows: cardiac death or spontaneous LMD-related myocardial infarction; and ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization of left main stem. Results: At a median follow-up period of 2.8 years, the primary end point occurred in 11 patients (14.9%) in the revascularized group and 21 patients (28.4%) in the deferred group (hazard ratio, 0.42 [95% CI, 0.20–0.89]; P =0.023). For the secondary end points, cardiac death or LMD-related myocardial infarction occurred significantly less frequently in the revascularized group (0.0% versus 8.1%; P =0.004). The rate of ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization of left main stem was also significantly lower in the revascularized group (5.4% versus 17.6%; hazard ratio, 0.20 [95% CI, 0.056–0.70]; P =0.012). Conclusions: In patients who underwent revascularization for stable coronary artery disease and physiologically significant LMD determined by instantaneous wave-free ratio, the long-term clinical outcomes were significantly improved as compared with those in whom revascularization was deferred.

Objective We sought to investigate whether long-term clinical outcomes differ following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with three-vessel disease (3VD) and lesions in the proximal left anterior descending artery (P-LAD). Methods This post-hoc analysis of the Synergy between PCI with Taxus and Cardiac Surgery (SYNTAX) Extended Survival study included patients with 3VD who were classified according to the presence or absence of lesions located in the P-LAD. Ten-year all-cause death and 5-year major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events (MACCE) were assessed. Results Among 1088 patients with 3VD, 559 (51.4%) had involvement of P-LAD and their 10-year mortality was numerically higher following PCI versus CABG (28.9% vs 21.9%; HR: 1.39, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.95). Although patients without P-LAD lesions had significantly higher 10-year mortality following PCI compared with CABG, there was no evidence of a treatment-by-subgroup interaction (28.8% vs 20.2%; HR: 1.47, 95% CI 1.03 to 2.09, pinteraction=0.837). The incidence of MACCE at 5 years was significantly higher with PCI than CABG, irrespective of involvement of P-LAD (with P-LAD: HR: 1.86, 95% CI 1.36 to 2.55; without P-LAD: HR: 1.54, 95% CI 1.11 to 2.12; pinteraction=0.408). Individualised assessment using the SYNTAX Score II 2020 established that a quarter of patients with P-LAD lesions had significantly higher mortality with PCI than CABG, whereas in the remaining three-quarters CABG had similar mortality. Conclusions Among patients with 3VD, the presence or absence of a P-LAD lesion was not associated with any treatment effect on long-term outcomes following PCI or CABG. Trial registration number SYNTAXES: NCT03417050; SYNTAX: NCT00114972.

Background Intramyocardial edema and hemorrhage are key pathological mechanisms in the development of reperfusion‐related microvascular damage in ST‐segment–elevation myocardial infarction. These processes may be facilitated by abrupt restoration of intracoronary pressure and flow triggered by primary percutaneous coronary intervention. We investigated whether pressure‐controlled reperfusion via gradual reopening of the infarct‐related artery may limit microvascular injury in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Methods and Results A total of 83 patients with ST‐segment–elevation myocardial infarction were assessed for eligibility and 53 who did not meet inclusion criteria were excluded. The remaining 30 patients with totally occluded infarct‐related artery were randomized to the pressure‐controlled reperfusion with delayed stenting (PCRDS) group (n=15) or standard primary percutaneous coronary intervention with immediate stenting (IS) group (n=15) (intention‐to‐treat population). Data from 5 patients in each arm were unsuitable to be included in the final analysis. Finally, 20 patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention who were randomly assigned to either IS (n=10) or PCRDS (n=10) were included. In the PCRDS arm, a 1.5‐mm balloon was used to achieve initial reperfusion with thrombolysis in myocardial infarction grade 3 flow and, subsequently, to control distal intracoronary pressure over a 30‐minute monitoring period (MP) until stenting was performed. In both study groups, continuous assessment of coronary hemodynamics with intracoronary pressure and Doppler flow velocity was performed, with a final measurement of zero flow pressure (primary end point of the study) at the end of a 60‐minute MP. There were no complications associated with IS or PCRDS. PCRDS effectively led to lower distal intracoronary pressures than IS over 30 minutes after reperfusion (71.2±9.37 mm Hg versus 90.13±12.09 mm Hg, P =0.001). Significant differences were noted between study arms in the microcirculatory response over MP. Microvascular perfusion progressively deteriorated in the IS group and at the end of MP, and hyperemic microvascular resistance was significantly higher in the IS arm as compared with the PCDRS arm (2.83±0.56 mm Hg.s.cm −1 versus 1.83±0.53 mm Hg.s.cm −1 , P =0.001). The primary end point (zero flow pressure) was significantly lower in the PCRDS group than in the IS group (41.46±17.85 mm Hg versus 76.87±21.34 mm Hg, P =0.001). In the whole study group (n=20), reperfusion pressures measured at predefined stages in the early reperfusion period showed robust associations with zero flow pressure values measured at the end of the 1‐hour MP (immediately after reperfusion: r =0.782, P <0.001; at the 10th minute: r =0.796, P <0.001; and at the 20th minute: r =0.702, P =0.001) and peak creatine kinase MB level (immediately after reperfusion: r =0.653, P =0.002; at the 10th minute: r =0.597, P =0.007; and at the 20th minute: r =0.538, P =0.017). Enzymatic myocardial infarction size was lower in the PCRDS group than in the IS group with peak troponin T (5395±2991 ng/mL versus 8874±1927 ng/mL, P =0.006) and creatine kinase MB (163.6±93.4 IU/L versus 542.2±227.4 IU/L, P <0.001). Conclusions In patients with ST‐segment–elevation myocardial infarction, pressure‐controlled reperfusion of the culprit vessel by means of gradual reopening of the occluded infarct‐related artery (PCRDS) led to better‐preserved coronary microvascular integrity and smaller myocardial infarction size, without an increase in procedural complications, compared with IS. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT02732080.

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.

Abstract Background Severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) uses angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptor as a means to enter the host. High density of ACE2 receptor in vascular endothelial cells may explain why vascular complications related to endothelial dysfunction occur in COVID-19. However, in vivo assessment of vascular endothelial function during COVID-19 has not been reported. Objective To investigate the vascular endothelial function and its temporal changes in COVID-19 patients. Methods In this prospective blinded study, systemic endothelial function was assessed using plethysmography-derived peripheral arterial tonometry (PAT). The reactive hyperemia index (LnRHI), a measure of endothelium-mediated hyperaemia, and the augmentation index, a measure of arterial vascular stiffness, were measured in 102 individuals across three study groups using PAT: group 1 (active infection), constituted by 20 patients hospitalised due to acute COVID-19; group 2 (past infection), constituted by 52 patients who had recovered from COVID-19; and group 3 (controls), constituted by 30 healthcare workers not infected by SARS-CoV-2. Additionally, among group 1, PAT assessment was repeated in 14 patients several weeks after recovery from acute COVID-19. PAT studies were analysed at a blinded fashion with respect to the assigned study group. Results Lower resting PAT amplitude was found in acute COVID-19 patients compared to the other groups (ratio of arterial tone signal between hyperemia to resting condition was 1.5 [interquartile range, 1.1] in group 1, 1.3 [0.3] in group 2 and 1.2 [0.3] in group 3, p=0.041). On the contrary, no significant differences between groups were found with respect to the hyperemic PAT amplitude (867.9 [486.1] in group 1, 944.7 [748.1] in group 2 and 819.3 [639.6] in group 3, p=0.444). Due to the lower resting PAT amplitude, there was a paradoxically significantly increased LnRHI during acute COVID-19 compared to past infection and controls (0.73 [0.32] vs. 0.53 [0.31] vs. 0.44 [0.23], respectively; p=0.013) (Figure A). Furthermore, among group 1 patients, LnRHI normalised markedly from acute COVID-19 to past infection stage (0.73 [0.32] vs. 0.49 [0.28], respectively; p=0.005) (Figure B). Augmentation index was significantly higher during acute COVID-19 compared to past COVID-19 and controls (9.6 [19.1] in group 1, 6.97 [18.6] in group 2 and −0.35 [20.53] in group 3; p=0.045 for COVID groups vs. controls). Conclusions Non-invasive assessment of systemic vascular endothelial function with PAT revealed significant differences between subjects with acute COVID-19, past COVID-19 and controls. Lower baseline PAT amplitude and high augmentation index suggest vasoconstriction at rest during the acute phase of COVID-19. These findings open new research opportunities to investigate the prognostic value of PAT in COVID-19 patients. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: None.

Background: There is great degree of interobserver variability in the visual angiographic assessment of left main coronary disease (LMCD). Fractional flow reserve and intravascular ultrasound are often used in this setting. The use of instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) for evaluation of LMCD has not been well studied. The aim of this study is to evaluate the use of iFR in the assessment of angiographically intermediate LMCD. Methods: This is an international multicenter retrospective observational study of patients who underwent both iFR and intravascular ultrasound evaluation for angiographically intermediate LMCD. An independent core laboratory performed blinded off-line analysis of all intravascular ultrasound data. A minimum lumen area of 6 mm 2 was used as the cutoff for significant disease. Results: One hundred twenty-five patients (mean age, 68.4±9.5 years, 84.8% male) were included in this analysis. Receiver operating curve analysis showed that an iFR of ≤0.89 identified minimum lumen area <6 mm 2 with an area under the curve of 0.77 (77% sensitivity, 66% specificity; P <0.0001). Among the 69 patients without ostial left anterior descending artery or left circumflex artery disease, receiver operating curve analysis showed that an iFR of ≤0.89 identified minimum lumen area <6 mm 2 with an area under the curve of 0.84 (70% sensitivity, 84% specificity; P <0.0001). The correlation was not significantly different when the body surface area was considered. Conclusions: In this study, in patients with intermediate LMCD, iFR of ≤0.89 correlates with intravascular ultrasound minimum lumen area <6 mm 2 regardless of body surface area. The current study supports the use of iFR for the evaluation of intermediate LMCD.

Background Resistive reserve ratio (RRR), or the ratio of baseline to hyperemic microvascular resistance, has prognostic implications in predicting clinical outcomes in patients with obstructive coronary artery disease. However, its value in patients with angina or ischemia with nonobstructive coronary artery disease is unknown. Methods and Results We included 1692 patients with nonobstructive coronary artery disease who underwent invasive coronary vasoreactivity testing. Abnormal coronary flow reserve (CFR, the ratio of hyperemic and baseline resting flow velocities) and RRR were defined as <2.5 and <2.62, respectively. The mortality rate was marginally higher in patients with abnormal CFR (428 patients [25%]) than those with normal CFR (38 [9%] versus 81 [6%]; P =0.08), and was significantly higher in patients with abnormal RRR (716 patients [42%]) than those with normal RRR (70 [10%] versus 49 [5%], P =0.0002) over the median follow‐up of 11.3 years. Patients with abnormal CFR had marginally lower survival than those with normal CFR (log‐rank P =0.08). In contrast, patients with abnormal RRR had significantly lower survival than those with normal RRR (log‐rank P =0.001). Abnormal RRR was associated with shorter time to death even after adjustment for other covariates (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.11–2.38; P =0.01). Conclusions In patients with no obstructive coronary artery disease, RRR was superior to CFR in predicting long‐term survival. An RRR <2.62 was associated with 1.6 times increased risk of death in patients with nonobstructive coronary artery disease. Indices of coronary microcirculatory resistive reserve comprising flow‐ and pressure‐derived values may reflect underlying microvascular pathology more faithfully than flow‐alone indices like CFR.