Why the study?
Invasive coronary function testing identifies microvascular dysfunction in ANOCA, but challenges remain regarding different measurement techniques and adenosine injection routes.
Do thermodilution and Doppler techniques yield different frequencies of coronary microvascular dysfunction diagnosis in patients with ANOCA?
Population
238 consecutive ANOCA patients undergoing coronary function testing at 2 German cardiovascular centres
Comparison
Thermodilution vs Doppler techniques, and intracoronary vs intravenous adenosine administration
Design
Two-centre observational study
Key result
In patients with ANOCA, abnormal coronary flow reserve was detected less frequently with the thermodilution technique compared to the Doppler technique (26% vs 43%, p=0.007).
Authors
Loading...
Technique choice yields discrepant CMD rates in ANOCA; leaves open standardization of invasive testing.
Observational (n=238)
Yes
Do thermodilution and Doppler techniques yield different frequencies of coronary microvascular dysfunction diagnosis in patients with ANOCA?
Absolute Event Rate: 26% vs 43%
p-value: p=0.007
The frequency of diagnosing impaired coronary flow reserve and microvascular resistance in ANOCA patients differs markedly depending on whether thermodilution or Doppler techniques are used.
Lauinger et al. (2025) conducted an observational in Angina and unobstructed coronary arteries (ANOCA) (n=238). Thermodilution technique vs. Doppler technique was evaluated on Frequency of abnormal coronary flow reserve (CFR <2.5) (p=0.007). In patients with ANOCA, abnormal coronary flow reserve was detected less frequently with the thermodilution technique compared to the Doppler technique (26% vs 43%, p=0.007).