Key result
Acetylcholine-induced chest pain in INOCA links to lower microvascular resistance and increased resting coronary flow.
Why the study?
Acetylcholine-induced chest pain is routinely measured during microvascular function assessment, but its relationships with symptom burden and objective vascular function measures needed determination.
Does acetylcholine-induced chest pain correlate with objective measures of coronary vascular function and symptom status in patients with angina and non-obstructive coronary arteries?
Observational (n=87)
No
Does acetylcholine-induced chest pain correlate with objective measures of coronary vascular function and symptom status in patients with angina and non-obstructive coronary arteries?
Acetylcholine-induced chest pain in patients with non-obstructive CAD is associated with increased baseline coronary blood flow and decreased microvascular resistance, challenging the assumption that it primarily represents microvascular spasm.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Acetylcholine-induced pain should not yet alter ANOCA management; challenges spasm assumption and leaves open its diagnostic value.
Background Acetylcholine-induced chest pain is routinely measured during the assessment of microvascular function. Aims The aim was to determine the relationships between acetylcholine-induced chest pain and both symptom burden and objective measures of vascular function. Methods In patients with angina but no obstructive coronary artery disease, invasive studies determined the presence or absence of chest pain during both acetylcholine and adenosine infusion. Thermodilution-derived coronary blood flow (CBF) and index of microvascular resistance (IMR) was determined at rest and during both acetylcholine and adenosine infusion. Patients with epicardial spasm (>90%) were excluded; vasoconstriction between 20% and 90% was considered endothelial dysfunction. Results Eighty-seven patients met the inclusion criteria. Of these 52 patients (60%) experienced chest pain during acetylcholine while 35 (40%) did not. Those with acetylcholine-induced chest pain demonstrated: (1) Increased CBF at rest (1.6 ± 0.7 vs. 1.2 ± 0.4, p = 0.004) (2) Decreased IMR with acetylcholine (acetylcholine-IMR = 29.7 ± 16.3 vs. 40.4 ± 17.1, p = 0.004), (3) Equivalent IMR following adenosine (Adenosine-IMR: 21.1 ± 10.7 vs. 21.8 ± 8.2, p = 0.76), (4) Increased adenosine-induced chest pain (40/52 = 77% vs. 7/35 = 20%, p < 0.0001), (5) Increased chest pain during exercise testing (30/46 = 63% vs. 4/29 = 12%, p < 0.00001) with no differences in exercise duration or electrocardiographic changes, and (6) Increased prevalence of epicardial endothelial dysfunction (33/52 = 63% vs. 14/35 = 40%, p = 0.03). Conclusions After excluding epicardial spasm, acetylcholine-induced chest pain is associated with increased pain during exercise and adenosine infusion, increased coronary blood flow at rest, decreased microvascular resistance in response to acetylcholine and increased prevalence of epicardial endothelial dysfunction. These findings raise questions about the mechanisms underlying acetylcholine-induced chest pain.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Miner et al. (2023) conducted an observational in Ischemic-sounding chest pain and non-obstructive coronary arteries (n=87). Acetylcholine-induced chest pain vs. No acetylcholine-induced chest pain was evaluated on Index of microvascular resistance during acetylcholine infusion (Ach-IMR) (p=0.004). Acetylcholine-induced chest pain in patients with non-obstructive coronary arteries was associated with decreased microvascular resistance and increased resting coronary blood flow.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: