Why the study?
Does successful PCI improve coronary flow velocity reserve and aortic distensibility in patients with significant proximal LAD stenosis?
Does successful PCI improve coronary flow velocity reserve and aortic distensibility in patients with significant proximal LAD stenosis?
Successful PCI in patients with LAD stenosis is associated with simultaneous improvements in coronary flow velocity reserve and aortic distensibility.
Supports PCI-associated CFR and distensibility gains in LAD stenosis; leaves open causal effects and outcome relevance.
OBJECTIVE: Deteriorations in coronary flow velocity reserve (CFR) and aortic distensibility have been demonstrated in coronary artery disease. The objective of the present study was a simultaneous echocardiographic evaluation of the CFR and aortic distensibility indices before and after successful percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) in patients with left anterior descending coronary artery (LAD) disease. METHODS: The study population, comprising 12 patients (4 women and 8 men) with significant proximal LAD stenosis, were compared with matched controls. Transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) was carried out to evaluate the CFR and aortic distensibility indices (the aortic elastic modulus E(p) and Young's circumferential static elastic modulus E(s)) before and after PCI to the LAD. The subjects underwent TEE on average 8 +/- 11 days before PCI and 25 +/- 6 weeks after PCI. RESULTS: An improvement in CFR was demonstrated in patients with LAD stenosis after successful PCI (1.71 +/- 0.36 vs. 2.08 +/- 0.28, P < 0.05), which paralleled the decreases in E(p) (936 +/- 544 mmHg vs. 567 +/- 184 mmHg, P < 0.05) and E(s) (10,207 +/- 6,295 mmHg vs. 5,831 +/- 2,010 mmHg, P < 0.05) during the follow-up. CONCLUSION: The aortic distensibility improves in parallel with the increase in CFR in patients with LAD stenosis after successful PCI.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nemes et al. (2010) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: