Why the study?
Does the presence of stable CAD alter the TIMI frame count in angiographically normal coronary arteries in patients with stable angina?
Does the presence of stable CAD alter the TIMI frame count in angiographically normal coronary arteries in patients with stable angina?
Patients with stable CAD exhibit impaired microvascular perfusion, as indicated by higher TIMI frame counts, even in their angiographically normal coronary arteries.
May indicate microvascular dysfunction in stable CAD; leaves open its prognostic value and need for prospective validation.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) frame count (TFC) in the coronary arteries without visible atherosclerosis in coronary angiography of patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD). METHODS: Eighty-three patients (mean age 58+/-10, 31 [37%] males), who underwent coronary angiographic evaluation for stable angina in Gazi University, Ankara, Turkey, Cardiology clinic between 2006-2007 were enrolled. Forty patients with normal coronary arteries were defined as group I. Group II consisted of 43 patients, who have one normal coronary artery in the setting of stable CAD defined as stenoses 50% or greater in at least one major coronary artery. Coronary blood flow and microvascular perfusion was evaluated by TFC. RESULTS: In group II, the TFC of left anterior descending artery (LAD) in 15 patients, TFC of circumflex artery (CX) in 18 patient, and TFC of right coronary artery (RCA) in 10 patients were evaluated. In group II, the TFC of LAD (37+/-12 versus 29+/-12, p=0.015) and CX (22+/-8 versus 18+/-9, p=0.035) were significantly higher than those in group I. The TFC of RCA was similar between groups (17+/-9 versus 17+/-8, p=0.990). After the adjustment of the risk factors by multivariate regression analyses, the association between TFC and clinical characteristic was statistically non-significant. CONCLUSION: The TFC decreased in angiographically normal LAD and CX arteries in the setting of stable angina pectoris. The important predictor was CAD alone, irrespective of the clinical parameters.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tacoy et al. (2009) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: