Key result
CMD is linked to lower peak circumferential diastolic strain rate, indicating impaired LV diastolic function.
Why the study?
The study evaluated left ventricular diastolic function in subjects with coronary microvascular dysfunction using cardiovascular magnetic resonance feature-tracking.
Does coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMD) impair left ventricular diastolic function as measured by cardiovascular magnetic resonance feature-tracking (CMR-FT) in patients with suspected myocardial ischemia?
Observational (n=92)
No
Does coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMD) impair left ventricular diastolic function as measured by cardiovascular magnetic resonance feature-tracking (CMR-FT) in patients with suspected myocardial ischemia?
Absolute Event Rate: 1.22% vs 1.26%
p-value: p=0.019
Cardiovascular magnetic resonance feature-tracking demonstrates that patients with coronary microvascular dysfunction have impaired left ventricular diastolic function compared to those without CMD.
CMD-associated diastolic strain impairment on CMR-FT should not yet change practice; leaves open prognostic value and need for longitudinal validation.
To evaluate left ventricular (LV) diastolic function in subjects with CMD using cardiovascular magnetic resonance-feature tracking (CMR-FT), we included 92 patients with suspected myocardial ischemia. Of them, 19 patients were included in the non-CMD group (49 ± 11 years) and CMD group included 73 patients (52±12 years) based on the stress perfusion cardiac magnetic resonance results. CMR-derived volume-time curves and CMR feature-tracking (CMR-FT) parameters were used to derive indices of diastolic dysfunction. The former included early peak filling rate (PFR) and time-to-peak-filling rate (T-PFR). The latter included LV global peak longitudinal diastolic strain rate (LDSR), circumferential diastolic strain rate (CDSR) and radial diastolic strain rate (RDSR). Compared to the non-CMD group, CDSR (1.26±0.8 vs. 1.22±0.8, P< 0.05), and RDSR (-2.23±2.5 vs.-2.17±2.0, P< 0.05) were significantly lower in the CMD group. PFR, T-PFR and LDSR showed no difference between the two groups. In Conclusion, the parameters reflecting left ventricular diastolic function on CMR were reduced in CMD patients that suggests left ventricular diastolic dysfunction in CMD patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kong et al. (2022) conducted an observational in Coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMD) in INOCA (n=92). Coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMD) vs. Non-CMD was evaluated on Peak circumferential diastolic strain rate (CDSR) (p=0.019). Coronary microvascular dysfunction was associated with significantly lower peak circumferential diastolic strain rate (1.22 vs 1.26 s-1) compared to patients without CMD, indicating impaired left ventricular diastolic function.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: