Key result
Angiography-derived IMR correlates moderately with invasive pressure-wire IMR but has wide limits of agreement.
Why the study?
The validity of angiography-derived indices of microvascular resistance in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy remains uncertain.
Does angiography-derived IMR accurately estimate invasive pressure-wire IMR in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy?
Cross-Sectional (n=30)
Does angiography-derived IMR accurately estimate invasive pressure-wire IMR in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy?
Angiography-derived IMR shows moderate correlation but wide limits of agreement compared to invasive IMR in HCM, indicating it cannot currently replace invasive assessment at the individual level.
Angiography-derived IMR should not yet replace invasive assessment in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy; leaves open its role pending larger validation studies.
Angiography-derived indices of microvascular resistance offer wire-free assessment from routine angiograms, but their validity in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) remains uncertain. We evaluated correlation, agreement, diagnostic performance, and reproducibility of angiography-derived IMR versus invasive pressure-wire IMR in HCM. Consecutive HCM patients without obstructive coronary artery disease underwent invasive left anterior descending artery IMR during adenosine hyperaemia. Angiography-derived IMR was computed offline using three-dimensional reconstruction, QFR, TIMI frame count, and pressure assumptions. Analyses included Spearman correlation, Bland-Altman agreement, ROC analysis, and intraclass correlation coefficients. Thirty patients were included. Invasive IMR was ≥ 25 mmHg × s in 20 patients (67%). Angiography-derived IMR correlated moderately with invasive IMR (Spearman r = 0.53, 95% CI 0.21-0.75; P = 0.003). Bland-Altman analysis showed a mean bias of 4.1 mmHg × s, with 95% limits of agreement from - 28.4 to 36.6 mmHg × s. Angiography-derived IMR identified invasive IMR ≥ 25 mmHg × s with an AUC of 0.83 (95% CI 0.65-0.96). The optimal cutoff was 26, yielding 80% sensitivity (95% CI 56-94%) and 80% specificity (95% CI 44-97%). Intra-observer reproducibility was high and inter-observer reproducibility moderate. In HCM, angiography-derived IMR showed moderate correlation and acceptable cohort-level discrimination but wide agreement limits, indicating limited individual-level interchangeability. HCM-specific refinement is required before replacing invasive microvascular assessment.Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03479580.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Brunel et al. (2026) conducted a cross-sectional in Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (n=30). Angiography-derived IMR vs. Invasive pressure-wire IMR was evaluated on Correlation between angiography-derived IMR and invasive pressure-wire IMR (Spearman r 0.53, 95% CI 0.21-0.75, p=0.003). Angiography-derived IMR showed moderate correlation with invasive pressure-wire IMR (Spearman r=0.53; 95% CI 0.21-0.75; P=0.003) but had wide limits of agreement.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: