Impact of coronary hyperemia on collateral flow correction of coronary microvascular resistance indices.

Recently, a novel method to estimate wedge pressure (Pw)-corrected minimal microvascular resistance (MR) was introduced. However, this method has not been validated since, and there are some theoretical concerns regarding the impact of different physiological conditions on the derivation of Pw measurements. This study sought to validate the recently introduced method to estimate Pw-corrected MR in a Doppler-derived study population and to evaluate the impact of different physiological conditions on the Pw measurements and the derivation of Pw-corrected MR. The method to derive "estimated" hyperemic microvascular resistance (HMR) without the need for Pw measurements was validated by estimating the coronary fractional flow reserve (FFRcor) from myocardial fractional flow reserve (FFRmyo) in a Doppler-derived study population (N = 53). From these patients, 24 had hyperemic Pw measurements available for the evaluation of hyperemic conditions on the derivation of Pw and its effect on the derivation of both "true" (with measured Pw) and "estimated" Pw-corrected HMR. Nonhyperemic Pw differed significantly from Pw measured in hyperemic conditions (26 ± 14 vs. 35 ± 14 mmHg, respectively, P < 0.005). Nevertheless, there was a strong linear relationship between FFRcor and FFRmyo in nonhyperemic conditions (R2 = 0.91, P < 0.005), as well as in hyperemic conditions (R2 = 0.87, P < 0.005). There was a strong linear relationship between "true" HMR and "estimated" HMR using either nonhyperemic (R2 = 0.86, P < 0.005) or hyperemic conditions (R2 = 0.85, P < 0.005) for correction. In contrast to a modest agreement between nonhyperemic Pw-corrected HMR and apparent HMR (R2 = 0.67, P < 0.005), hyperemic Pw-corrected HMR showed a strong agreement with apparent HMR (R2 = 0.88, P < 0.005). We validated the calculation method for Pw-corrected MR in a Doppler velocity-derived population. In addition, we found a significant impact of hyperemic conditions on the measurement of Pw and the derivation of Pw-corrected HMR.NEW & NOTEWORTHY The following are what is known: 1) wedge-pressure correction is often considered for the derivation of indices of minimal microvascular resistance, and 2) the Yong method for calculating wedge pressure-corrected index of microvascular resistance (IMR) without balloon inflation has never been validated in a Doppler-derived population and has not been tested under different physiological conditions. This study 1) adds validation for the Yong method for calculated wedge-pressure correction in a Doppler-derived study population and 2) shows significant influence of the physiological conditions on the derivation of coronary wedge pressure.

Comparison of the Diagnostic Yield of Intracoronary Acetylcholine Infusion and Acetylcholine Bolus Injection Protocols During Invasive Coronary Function Testing.

Coronary endothelial dysfunction (CED) and coronary artery spasm (CAS) are causes of angina with no obstructive coronary arteries in patients. Both can be diagnosed by invasive coronary function testing (ICFT) using acetylcholine (ACh). This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic yield of a 3-minute ACh infusion as compared with a 1-minute ACh bolus injection protocol in testing CED and CAS. We evaluated 220 consecutive patients with angina and no obstructive coronary arteries who underwent ICFT using continuous Doppler flow measurements. Per protocol, 110 patients were tested using 3-minute infusion, and thereafter 110 patients using 1-minute bolus injections, because of a protocol change. CED was defined as a <50% increase in coronary blood flow or any epicardial vasoconstriction in reaction to low-dose ACh and CAS according to the Coronary Vasomotor Disorders International Study Group (COVADIS) criteria, both with and without T-wave abnormalities, in reaction to high dose ACh. The prevalence of CED was equal in both protocols (78% vs 79%, p = 0.869). Regarding the endotypes of CAS according to COVADIS, the equivocal endotype was diagnosed less often in the 3 vs 1-minute protocol (24% vs 44%, p = 0.004). Including T-wave abnormalities in the COVADIS criteria resulted in a similar diagnostic yield of both protocols. Hemodynamic changes from baseline to the low or high ACh doses were comparable between the protocols for each endotype. In conclusion, ICFT using 3-minute infusion or 1-minute bolus injections of ACh showed a similar diagnostic yield of CED. When using the COVADIS criteria, a difference in the equivocal diagnosis was observed. Including T-wave abnormalities as a diagnostic criterion reclassified equivocal test results into CAS and decreased this difference. For clinical practice, we recommend the inclusion of T-wave abnormalities as a diagnostic criterion for CAS and the 1-minute bolus protocol for practicality.