Evaluation and clinical applicability of angiography-derived assessment of coronary microcirculatory resistance: a [15O]H2O PET study

  • Ruurt A. Jukema
  • , Pieter G. Raijmakers
  • , Masahiro Hoshino
  • , Roel S. Driessen
  • , Pepijn A. van Diemen
  • , Juhani Knuuti
  • , Teemu Maaniitty
  • , Jos Twisk
  • , Rolf A. Kooistra
  • , Janny Timmer
  • , Johan H.C. Reiber
  • , Pim van der Harst
  • , Maarten J. Cramer
  • , Tim van der Hoef
  • , Paul Knaapen
  • , Ibrahim Danad*
  • *Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

The introduction of wire-free microcirculatory resistance index from functional angiography (angio-IMR) promises swift detection of coronary microvascular dysfunction, however it has not been properly validated. We sought to validate angio-IMR against invasive IMR and PET derived microvascular resistance (MVR). Moreover, we studied if angio-IMR could aid in the detection of ischemia with non-obstructive coronary arteries (INOCA). In this investigator-initiated study symptomatic patients underwent [15O]H2O positron emission tomography (PET) and invasive angiography with 3-vessel fractional flow reserve (FFR). Invasive IMR was measured in 40 patients. Angio-IMR and QFR were computed retrospectively. MVR was defined as the ratio of mean distal coronary pressure to PET derived coronary flow. PET and QFR/angio-IMR analyses were performed by blinded core labs. The right coronary artery was excluded. A total of 211 patients (mean age 61 ± 9, 148 (70%) male) with 312 vessels with successful angio-IMR analyses were included. Angio-IMR correlated moderately with invasive IMR (r = 0.48, p < 0.01), whereas no correlation was found between angio-IMR and MVR (r=-0.07, p = 0.25). Angio-IMR did not differ for vessels without obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) (FFR-) but with reduced stress perfusion (PET+) compared to vessels without obstructive CAD (FFR-) with normal stress perfusion (PET-) (median 28.19 IQR 20.42–38.99 vs. 31.67 IQR 23.47–40.63, p = 0.40). Angio-IMR correlated moderately with invasively measured IMR, whereas angio-IMR did not correlate with PET derived MVR. Moreover, angio-IMR did not reliably identify patients with INOCA.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)37–46
Number of pages10
JournalInternational Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging
Volume41
Issue number1
Early online date9 Dec 2024
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2025

Keywords

  • Angio-IMR
  • IMR
  • INOCA
  • MVR
  • PET

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Evaluation and clinical applicability of angiography-derived assessment of coronary microcirculatory resistance: a [15O]H2O PET study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this