Key result
Impaired CFVR in ANOCA is linked to ~47% higher angina-related healthcare utilisation.
Why the study?
Does impaired coronary flow velocity reserve (<2.25) increase recurrent angina-related healthcare utilisation in women with ANOCA?
Cohort (n=1,681)
Participants and treating clinicians blinded to CFVR test results
Does impaired coronary flow velocity reserve (<2.25) increase recurrent angina-related healthcare utilisation in women with ANOCA?
In women with ANOCA, coronary microvascular dysfunction (CFVR <2.25) is independently associated with a persistent, long-term increase in angina-related hospitalisations, outpatient contacts, and diagnostic procedures over 11 years.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May support CFVR-based risk stratification in women with ANOCA; leaves open whether targeted interventions reduce utilisation.
No abstract yet. The journal hasn't published one we can show.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Laura Rytoft (2026) conducted a cohort in Angina with no obstructive coronary artery disease (ANOCA) (n=1,681). Impaired coronary flow velocity reserve (CFVR <2.25) vs. Preserved coronary flow velocity reserve (CFVR ≥2.25) was evaluated on Composite of recurrent angina-related hospitalisations, outpatient contacts, and ischaemia-related diagnostic procedures (events per 100 person-years) (HR 1.47, 95% CI 1.10-1.97, p=<0.001). Impaired coronary flow velocity reserve (<2.25) in women with ANOCA was associated with higher recurrent angina-related healthcare utilisation compared to preserved CFVR (HR 1.47; 95% CI 1.10–1.97).
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: