Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Heart Vascular Stroke Institute, Samsung Medical Center Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine Seoul South Korea.
Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine Duke University Medical Center Durham NC.
J Am Heart Assoc. 2022 Aug 2;11(15):e025841. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.122.025841. Epub 2022 Jul 25.
Background Intracoronary physiologic indexes such as coronary flow reserve (CFR) and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) have been regarded as prognostic indicators in patients with coronary artery disease. The current study evaluated the association between intracoronary physiologic indexes and LVEF and their differential prognostic implications in patients with coronary artery disease. Methods and Results A total of 1889 patients with 2492 vessels with available CFR and LVEF were selected from an international multicenter prospective registry. Baseline physiologic indexes were measured by thermodilution or Doppler methods and LVEF was recorded at the index procedure. The primary outcome was target vessel failure, which was a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or clinically driven target vessel revascularization over 5 years of follow-up. Patients with reduced LVEF <50% (162 patients [8.6%], 202 vessels [8.1%]) showed a similar degree of epicardial coronary artery disease but lower CFR values than those with preserved LVEF (2.4±1.2 versus 2.7±1.2, <0.001), mainly driven by the increased resting coronary flow. Conversely, hyperemic coronary flow, fractional flow reserve, and the degree of microvascular dysfunction were similar between the 2 groups. Reduced CFR (≤2.0) was seen in 613 patients (32.5%) with 771 vessels (30.9%). Reduced CFR was an independent predictor for target vessel failure (hazard ratio, 2.081 [95% CI, 1.385-3.126], <0.001), regardless of LVEF. Conclusions CFR was lower in patients with reduced LVEF because of increased resting coronary flow. Patients with reduced CFR showed a significantly higher risk of target vessel failure than did those with preserved CFR, regardless of LVEF. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT04485234.
在冠状动脉疾病患者中,冠状动脉血流储备(CFR)和左心室射血分数(LVEF)等冠状动脉内生理学指标已被视为预后指标。本研究评估了冠状动脉疾病患者的冠状动脉内生理学指标与 LVEF 的相关性及其不同的预后意义。
共从一个国际多中心前瞻性注册研究中选取了 1889 例患者(共 2492 支血管),这些患者的 CFR 和 LVEF 均可用。通过热稀释法或多普勒法测量基线生理指标,并在指数程序中记录 LVEF。主要终点是靶血管失败,即 5 年随访期间的心脏死亡、靶血管心肌梗死或临床驱动的靶血管血运重建的复合终点。LVEF 降低(<50%)的患者(162 例[8.6%],202 支血管[8.1%])表现出相似程度的冠状动脉粥样硬化疾病,但 CFR 值低于 LVEF 正常者(2.4±1.2 比 2.7±1.2,<0.001),主要原因是静息冠状动脉血流增加。相反,两组间的充血性冠状动脉血流、血流储备分数和微血管功能障碍程度相似。613 例(32.5%)患者存在 CFR 降低(≤2.0),涉及 771 支血管(30.9%)。CFR 降低是靶血管失败的独立预测因子(危险比,2.081[95%置信区间,1.385-3.126],<0.001),与 LVEF 无关。
LVEF 降低的患者 CFR 降低是由于静息冠状动脉血流增加所致。与 CFR 正常者相比,CFR 降低的患者靶血管失败风险显著更高,而与 LVEF 无关。