Simplified Assessment of the Index of Microvascular Resistance.
Aged
Cardiac Catheterization
/ methods
Coronary Artery Disease
/ diagnosis
Coronary Circulation
/ physiology
Coronary Vessels
/ physiopathology
Female
Humans
Male
Microcirculation
/ physiology
Operative Time
Prospective Studies
Reproducibility of Results
Severity of Illness Index
Vascular Resistance
/ physiology
Work Simplification
Journal
Journal of interventional cardiology
ISSN: 1540-8183
Titre abrégé: J Interv Cardiol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8907826
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2021
2021
Historique:
received:
29
03
2021
accepted:
24
05
2021
entrez:
21
6
2021
pubmed:
22
6
2021
medline:
13
7
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
To validate a simplified invasive method for the calculation of the index of microvascular resistance (IMR). This is a prospective, single-center study of patients with chronic coronary syndromes presenting with nonobstructive coronary artery disease. IMR was obtained using both intravenous (IV) adenosine and intracoronary (IC) papaverine. Each IMR measurement was obtained in duplicate. The primary objective was the agreement between IMR acquired using adenosine and papaverine. Secondary objectives include reproducibility of IMR and time required for the IMR measurement. One hundred and sixteen IMR measurements were performed in 29 patients. The mean age was 68.8 ± 7.24 years, and 27.6% was diabetics. IMR values were similar between papaverine and adenosine (17.7 ± 7.26 and 20.1 ± 8.6, IMR can be reliably measured using IC papaverine with similar results compared to intravenous infusion of adenosine with increased reproducibility and reduced procedural time. This approach simplifies the invasive assessment of the coronary microcirculation in the catheterization laboratory.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
To validate a simplified invasive method for the calculation of the index of microvascular resistance (IMR).
METHODS
METHODS
This is a prospective, single-center study of patients with chronic coronary syndromes presenting with nonobstructive coronary artery disease. IMR was obtained using both intravenous (IV) adenosine and intracoronary (IC) papaverine. Each IMR measurement was obtained in duplicate. The primary objective was the agreement between IMR acquired using adenosine and papaverine. Secondary objectives include reproducibility of IMR and time required for the IMR measurement.
RESULTS
RESULTS
One hundred and sixteen IMR measurements were performed in 29 patients. The mean age was 68.8 ± 7.24 years, and 27.6% was diabetics. IMR values were similar between papaverine and adenosine (17.7 ± 7.26 and 20.1 ± 8.6,
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
IMR can be reliably measured using IC papaverine with similar results compared to intravenous infusion of adenosine with increased reproducibility and reduced procedural time. This approach simplifies the invasive assessment of the coronary microcirculation in the catheterization laboratory.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34149324
doi: 10.1155/2021/9971874
pmc: PMC8189791
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
9971874Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 Monika Kodeboina et al.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
DM, JS, and MK report research grants provided by the CardioPath Ph.D. program. BDB reports receiving consultancy fees from Boston Scientific and Abbott and receiving research grants from Coroventis Research, Pie Medical Imaging, CathWorks, Boston Scientific, Siemens, HeartFlow Inc., and Abbott Vascular. CC reports receiving research grants from Biosensor, Coroventis Research, GE Healthcare, Medis Medical Imaging, Pie Medical Imaging, CathWorks, Boston Scientific, Siemens, HeartFlow Inc., and Abbott Vascular and consultancy fees from HeartFlow Inc., Opsens, Pie Medical Imaging, Abbott Vascular, and Philips Volcano. TM reports consultancy fees from Zeon Medical. The other authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
Références
Circulation. 1996 Mar 1;93(5):879-88
pubmed: 8598078
Int J Cardiol. 2018 Jan 1;250:16-20
pubmed: 29031990
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2020 Feb 11;75(5):560-561
pubmed: 32029139
Eur Heart J. 2003 Aug;24(16):1506-14
pubmed: 12919775
Circulation. 2002 May 28;105(21):2482-6
pubmed: 12034653
Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2019 Sep;12(9):e007889
pubmed: 31525096
Heart Vessels. 2018 Nov;33(11):1358-1364
pubmed: 29713819
Eur Heart J. 2020 Oct 1;41(37):3504-3520
pubmed: 32626906
Circulation. 2016 Dec 6;134(23):1833-1847
pubmed: 27803036
J Am Heart Assoc. 2021 Feb 2;10(3):e018562
pubmed: 33459027
Circulation. 2004 Jun 22;109(24):2993-9
pubmed: 15197152
J Am Heart Assoc. 2012 Aug;1(4):e002246
pubmed: 23130166
Cathet Cardiovasc Diagn. 1986;12(5):298-303
pubmed: 3791404
Circulation. 2001 Oct 23;104(17):2003-6
pubmed: 11673336
N Engl J Med. 2017 Oct 19;377(16):1597-1598
pubmed: 29045200
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2020 Jan 13;13(1):33-45
pubmed: 31709984
Circulation. 2003 Jul 1;107(25):3129-32
pubmed: 12821539
Eur Heart J. 2020 Jan 14;41(3):407-477
pubmed: 31504439
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2014 Jun;7(6):581-91
pubmed: 24835328
Am J Transplant. 2015 May;15(5):1400-6
pubmed: 25766634
Circulation. 2006 May 2;113(17):2054-61
pubmed: 16636168
Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2013 Dec;6(6):654-61
pubmed: 24254709