Why the study?
Ischaemia with non-obstructive coronary arteries (INOCA) and coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMD) are not benign yet remain under-diagnosed and under-treated, prompting a synthesis of contemporary evidence on diagnostic methods, prognosis, and therapeutic strategies.
Do invasive and non-invasive coronary function testing and mechanism-targeted or intensive medical therapies improve diagnostic characterization, prognosis prediction, symptoms, or clinical outcomes in adults with INOCA and coronary microvascular dysfunction?
Systematic Review
Yes
Do invasive and non-invasive coronary function testing and mechanism-targeted or intensive medical therapies improve diagnostic characterization, prognosis prediction, symptoms, or clinical outcomes in adults with INOCA and coronary microvascular dysfunction?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Invasive coronary function testing enables mechanism-specific endotyping and robust risk stratification in INOCA, and while stratified medical therapy significantly improves angina and quality of life, no pharmacotherapy has yet been proven to reduce hard cardiovascular outcomes.
Background: Up to 70% of patients undergoing invasive coronary angiography for suspected angina have no obstructive coronary artery disease, and roughly two-thirds of this group have demonstrable coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMD). Ischaemia with non-obstructive coronary arteries (INOCA) is not benign, yet it remains under-diagnosed and under-treated. Objectives: To synthesise contemporary evidence on (i) diagnostic methods for CMD in INOCA, (ii) the prognostic weight of abnormal microvascular physiology, and (iii) the efficacy of therapeutic strategies, including stratified medicine and disease-modifying pharmacotherapy. Methods: A systematic review conducted according to PRISMA 2020. MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL and Web of Science were searched from January 2010 to June 2026 for consensus statements, diagnostic accuracy studies, prognostic cohorts and randomised controlled trials addressing CMD in INOCA. Risk of bias was appraised with RoB 2, QUADAS-2 and the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale. Given marked heterogeneity in index tests, thresholds and endpoints, synthesis was predominantly narrative, with quantitative pooling restricted to published meta-analytic estimates. Results: Thirty-eight records informed the synthesis. Invasive coronary function testing combining bolus thermodilution-derived coronary flow reserve (CFR) and index of microcirculatory resistance (IMR) with acetylcholine provocation now permits endotype-specific diagnosis; microvascular resistance reserve (MRR) and hyperaemic stenosis resistance refine assessment where epicardial disease coexists, with an MRR cut-off of 3.0 independently predicting 5-year major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE; HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.63–0.95). Abnormal CFR carried a pooled hazard ratio of 3.78 (95% CI 2.39–5.97) for all-cause mortality and 3.42 (95% CI 2.92–3.99) for MACE across 59,740 subjects; in isolated CMD the mortality signal was stronger still (HR 5.44, 95% CI 3.78–7.83). Stratified medical therapy guided by invasive testing improved the Seattle Angina Questionnaire summary score by 11.7 units at 6 months and 13.6 units at 12 months versus standard care. By contrast, two trials of disease-modifying strategies were neutral: zibotentan did not improve exercise duration (−4.26 s, 95% CI −19.60 to 11.06), and intensive medical therapy did not reduce MACE in 2,476 women (HR 1.13, 95% CI 0.94–1.37). Conclusions: Diagnosis of CMD in INOCA has matured from exclusion to precise, reproducible endotyping, and physiological abnormality is robustly prognostic. Therapeutic progress lags: stratified therapy reliably improves symptoms and quality of life, but no intervention has yet been shown to modify hard outcomes. Adequately powered, endotype-enriched outcome trials are the principal unmet need.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bhatia et al. (2026) conducted a systematic review in Ischaemia with non-obstructive coronary arteries (INOCA) and coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMD). Invasive coronary function testing (CFR, IMR, MRR, HSR, acetylcholine provocation), non-invasive MBF quantification (PET, CMR, CT), and stratified or disease-modifying medical therapy vs. Standard care, placebo, alternative diagnostic strategy, or internal reference standard was evaluated on All-cause mortality (from pooled meta-analysis of abnormal coronary flow reserve across 59,740 subjects) (HR 3.78, 95% CI 2.39-5.97).
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: