Clinical significance of coronary flow reserve: effect of papaverine and exercise.

BACKGROUND

The clinical significance of coronary flow reserve (CFR) was evaluated after pharmacological (papaverine) and physiological (exercise) vasodilation in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD).

METHODS

CFR was determined using parametric imaging in 10 patients with normal coronary arteries (group 1) and in 10 with CAD (group 2). Contrast density and mean appearance time were measured (region of interest = 249 pixels) in the perfusion beds of the left circumflex and the left anterior descending coronary arteries at rest, 45 s after 10 mg intracoronary papaverine, and during supine bicycle exercise. CFR was calculated from coronary perfusion after papaverine divided by perfusion at rest and coronary perfusion during exercise divided by perfusion at rest. Perfusion zones in patients with CAD were subdivided into regions supplied by a non-stenosed (group 2a) and a stenosed (group 2b) coronary artery.

RESULTS

In control patients, heart rate increased from 75 beats/min at rest to 125 beats/min during exercise, and in patients with CAD from 63 to 107 beats/min, respectively. Mean aortic pressure showed a significant increase during exercise in both groups. Mean pulmonary artery pressure increased significantly during exercise from 19 to 28 mmHg in control patients and from 22 to 42 mmHg in the CAD group (P < 0.001). Coronary driving pressure (mean aortic minus diastolic pulmonary artery pressure) tended to increase during exercise in the control group (from 90 to 101 mmHg, NS) and remained nearly unchanged in patients with CAD (from 92 to 94 mmHg, NS). In the control group, CFR was significantly higher during exercise than after papaverine (4.0 versus 3.5, respectively; P < 0.01). However, coronary resistance (coronary driving pressure divided by coronary flow index) was similar after papaverine and during exercise. In patients with CAD, papaverine-dependent CFR was significantly reduced in the perfusion zone of the stenosed (2.1) but not of the non-stenosed coronary artery (3.0). In contrast, CFR during exercise was significantly decreased in both perfusion zones (2.5 in non-stenosed arteries and 1.5 in stenosed vessels).

CONCLUSIONS

In control patients, CFR is slightly but significantly larger during exercise than after papaverine because of the exercise-induced increase in coronary driving pressure. In contrast, CFR is smaller during exercise than after papaverine in patients with CAD, most probably as a result of secondary mechanisms such as exercise-induced narrowing of stenosed vessels or an increase in extravascular resistance. Thus, CFR based on papaverine appears to be of limited value for assessing the functional significance of a stenotic lesion.