Homogeneity of the coronary microcirculation in angina with non-obstructive coronary artery disease

Masahiro Hoshino1, Roel Hoek1, Ruurt A Jukema1

  • 1Departments of Cardiology, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Insights

Coronary microcirculatory dysfunction (CMD) is generally consistent across major heart vessels in angina with non-obstructive coronary artery disease (ANOCA) patients. This suggests single-artery assessment is often sufficient for evaluating microvascular function.

Area of Science:

  • Cardiovascular Medicine
  • Diagnostic Imaging
  • Physiology

Background:

  • Coronary microcirculatory dysfunction (CMD) is a key factor in angina with non-obstructive coronary artery disease (ANOCA).
  • The homogeneity of CMD across different myocardial territories is not well understood.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate the variability of microvascular resistance reserve (MRR) across the three main coronary perfusion territories.
  • To determine if microvascular function is homogeneous or heterogeneous in ANOCA patients.

Main Methods:

  • Post-hoc analysis of the PACIFIC trials using [15O]H2O positron emission tomography (PET) and invasive fractional flow reserve (FFR).
  • MRR was calculated for three main coronary branches by integrating PET-derived coronary flow reserve and invasive FFR in 155 ANOCA patients.

Main Results:

  • No significant differences in MRR were found among the three coronary branches (mean MRR: 3.92 ± 1.21).
  • Good correlations (r = 0.76 to 0.86) and small mean differences (2.4% to 7.5%) in MRR were observed between vessels.
  • Approximately 80% of patients showed diagnostic concordance for CMD (MRR ≤3.0) across all three vessels, with an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.80.

Conclusions:

  • Microvascular function in ANOCA patients is largely homogeneous across the three major coronary territories.
  • Single-artery testing for microvascular function may be adequate in many ANOCA patients, consistent with current guidelines.
  • Multivessel evaluation might be beneficial in select cases with borderline findings due to potential inter-territorial variation.
Abstract