Key result
Vasodilatation with angiographic contrast medium resulted in a steeper diastolic pressure-flow velocity slope (0.80 vs 0.35 cm/s/mmHg, p<0.001) and a lower zero flow pressure intercept (p<0.05).
Why the study?
Does vasodilatation with angiographic contrast medium alter the diastolic coronary artery pressure-flow velocity relationship in conscious humans?
Population
10 conscious patients with a normal left coronary artery
Comparison
Vasodilatation with angiographic contrast medium vs Basal state (before vasodilatation)
Design
Other
Authors
Loading...
Supports caution interpreting coronary pressure-flow data during angiography; leaves open need for adjusted protocols in physiology studies.
Does vasodilatation with angiographic contrast medium alter the diastolic coronary artery pressure-flow velocity relationship in conscious humans?
p-value: p=<0.001
In conscious humans, the coronary diastolic pressure-flow velocity relationship is linear and consistent with a vascular waterfall model, where flow is regulated by changes in both zero flow pressure and coronary resistance.
Dole et al. (1984) studied Normal left coronary artery (n=10). Vasodilatation with angiographic contrast medium vs. Basal state was evaluated on Diastolic pressure-flow velocity relationship slope and zero flow pressure intercept (p=<0.001). Vasodilatation with angiographic contrast medium resulted in a steeper diastolic pressure-flow velocity slope (0.80 vs 0.35 cm/s/mmHg, p<0.001) and a lower zero flow pressure intercept (p<0.05).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: