Why the study?
Despite Class I recommendations in the 2024 ESC Guidelines, invasive coronary function testing for ANOCA has not translated into widespread clinical practice, warranting a standardized approach to optimize patient management.
This review provides a practical guide for interventional cardiologists to implement the 2024 ESC guidelines' Class I recommendation for invasive coronary function testing in patients with ANOCA.
Angina with non-obstructive coronary arteries (ANOCA) is increasingly recognized as a significant aspect of chronic coronary syndromes. These patients frequently experience recurrent angina, resulting in high healthcare costs and impaired quality of life. Invasive coronary function testing (ICFT) is able to identify ANOCA endotypes, which can guide treatment and improve quality of life. Despite Class II recommendations for invasive microvascular assessments in the previous 2019 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Guidelines, ICFT has yet to translate into widespread clinical practice. Patients with ANOCA experience poor quality of life and reduced functional capacity, highlighting the need for earlier ICFT implementation. The 2024 ESC Guidelines now strongly recommend ICFT (Class I, level of evidence B) for patients with non-obstructive coronary arteries and persistent angina despite optimal medical therapy, and for confirming or excluding ANOCA in patients with uncertain diagnoses on non-invasive testing (Class I, level of evidence B). Consequently, a standardized approach to optimize the management of ANOCA patients is warranted. Therefore, this review aims to provide interventional cardiologists with a contemporary review of the literature and a practical guideline on implementation of ICFT. It will discuss the following subjects: the definitions of the different endotypes, an example of an ICFT protocol, discontinuation of medication prior to ICFT, use of radial cocktail, target vessel for testing, acetylcholine injection techniques and rechallenge, adenosine injection techniques, the order of testing, the interpretation of ICFT, safety and feasibility, and the pharmacological treatment.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Namba et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: