Key result
Adenosine coronary blood flow response does not differ by HFpEF status in microvascular angina.
Why the study?
Coronary microvascular dysfunction may contribute to heart failure with preserved ejection fraction in patients with microvascular angina, but their relationship is unclear.
Is coronary microvascular dysfunction associated with findings of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction in patients with microvascular angina?
Observational (n=36)
Is coronary microvascular dysfunction associated with findings of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction in patients with microvascular angina?
Absolute Event Rate: 1.85% vs 1.49%
p-value: p=0.13
In patients with microvascular angina, the severity of coronary microvascular dysfunction does not appear to correlate with the presence of HFpEF findings.
No difference in coronary flow response by HFpEF status; leaves open whether CMD contributes to HFpEF.
BACKGROUND: Coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMD) may cause symptoms of myocardial ischemia (microvascular angina [MVA]), but recent studies suggested that it might also contribute to the syndrome of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). In this study we assessed the relation of CMD with findings of HFpEF in MVA patients. METHODS: We enrolled 36 consecutive patients with MVA, in whom we assessed: 1) coronary blood flow (CBF) response to adenosine and cold pressor test (CPT) by color-Doppler echocardiography of the left anterior descending coronary artery; 2) complete echocardiographic examination; 3) N-terminal-pro-B-natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP); 4) grade of dyspnea by the modified Medical Research Scale. RESULTS: Among patients, 15 had definite HFpEF findings (group 1), 12 had equivocal HFpEF findings (group 2) and 9 had no evidence of HFpEF findings (group 3). Group 1 patients were older, had more cardiovascular risk factors and higher NT-proBNP levels (P=0.018), and showed a higher prevalence of diastolic dysfunction. Left ventricle dimensions and systolic function, however, did not differ among groups. Dyspnea was also not significantly different among groups (P=0.19). CBF to adenosine was 1.85±0.47, 1.78±0.40 1.49±0.32 in group 1, 2 and 3, respectively (P=0.13). Similarly, CBF response to CPT was 1.57±0.4, 1.49±0.2 and 1.45±0.3 in the 3 groups, respectively (P=0.74). Both CBF response to adenosine and CPT showed no relation with the severity of dyspnea symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that in patients with MVA there is no relation between the grade of impairment of coronary microvascular dilatation and findings of HFpEF.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
A 2022 study conducted an observational in Microvascular angina (n=36). Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) findings vs. No evidence of HFpEF findings was evaluated on Coronary blood flow response to adenosine (p=0.13). In patients with microvascular angina, coronary blood flow response to adenosine did not significantly differ between those with definite HFpEF and those without (1.85 vs 1.49; P=0.13).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: