Key result
Distal coronary sites show ~75% higher microvascular resistance vs proximal sites, driven by smaller myocardial mass.
Why the study?
HMR assessment may depend on the coronary artery assessment location and the amount of distal partial myocardial mass.
Does the assessment location in the coronary artery (distal vs proximal) affect hyperemic microvascular resistance (HMR) measurements in patients with suspected myocardial ischemia?
Observational (n=26)
No
Does the assessment location in the coronary artery (distal vs proximal) affect hyperemic microvascular resistance (HMR) measurements in patients with suspected myocardial ischemia?
Coronary microvascular resistance indices are dependent on the amount of downstream myocardial mass; thus, physiological measurements should optimally be assessed at proximal locations subtending >35g of myocardium to minimize location-dependent bias.
HMR varies by site due to downstream mass; leaves open optimal proximal standardization for microvascular assessments.
The assessment of hyperemic microvascular resistance (HMR) may be dependent on the assessment location in the coronary artery and the amount of partial myocardial mass (PMM) distal to the assessment locations. The aim of this study was to investigate the differences in HMR values between the distal and proximal sites in the same coronary arteries as well as the relationship between HMR and PMM. Twenty-nine vessels from 26 patients who had undergone intracoronary physiological assessments including Doppler flow velocity at the distal third part and the proximal third part in the same vessels were assessed. The mean values of HMR and PMM at the distal sites were 2.08 ± 0.75 mmHg/cm/sec and 22.2 ± 10.4 g, respectively. At the proximal sites, the values of HMR and PMM were 1.19 ± 0.33 mmHg/cm/sec and 59.9 ± 18.3 g, respectively. All HMR values at the distal sites were significantly higher than those at the proximal sites (p < 0.001). Smaller PMM at the distal sites was significantly associated with higher HMR (r = -0.544, p = 0.002) and was the strongest factor affecting the HMR values (p = 0.009), while this relationship was not observed at the proximal sites (r = -0.262, p = 0.17). The impact of PMM on HMR was diminished at assessment locations where PMM was greater than 35 g. In conclusion, a small amount of downstream myocardial mass could be related to high HMR values. The assessment location around the proximal coronary artery with over 35 g of myocardium would be appropriate to assess HMR because it minimizes the influence of the assessment location.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Murai et al. (2022) conducted an observational in Suspected myocardial ischemia (n=26). Distal coronary assessment site vs. Proximal coronary assessment site was evaluated on Hyperemic microvascular resistance (HMR) values (Mean difference 0.89 mmHg/cm/sec, p=<0.001). Distal coronary assessment sites yielded significantly higher hyperemic microvascular resistance compared to proximal sites (2.08 vs 1.19 mmHg/cm/sec, p<0.001), strongly driven by smaller downstream myocardial mass.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: