Journal article icon

Journal article

Comparison of bolus versus continuous thermodilution derived indices of microvascular dysfunction in revascularized coronary syndromes

Abstract:

Background: The assessment of coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMD) using invasive methods is a field of growing interest, however the preferred method remains debated. Bolus and continuous thermodilution are commonly used methods, but weak agreement has been observed in patients with angina with non-obstructive coronary arteries (ANOCA). This study examined their agreement in revascularized acute coronary syndromes (ACS) and chronic coronary syndromes (CCS) patients.

Objective: To compare bolus thermodilution and continuous thermodilution indices of CMD in revascularized ACS and CCS patients and assess their diagnostic agreement at pre-defined cut-off points.

Methods: Patients from two centers underwent paired bolus and continuous thermodilution assessments after revascularization. CMD indices were compared between the two methods and their agreements at binary cut-off points were assessed.

Results: Ninety-six patients and 116 vessels were included. The mean age was 64 ± 11 years, and 20 (21 %) were female. Overall, weak correlations were observed between the Index of Microcirculatory Resistance (IMR) and continuous thermodilution microvascular resistance (Rµ) (rho = 0.30p = 0.001). The median coronary flow reserve (CFR) from continuous thermodilution (CFRcont) and bolus thermodilution (CFRbolus) were 2.19 (1.76–2.67) and 2.55 (1.50–3.58), respectively (p < 0.001). Weak correlation and agreement were observed between CFRcont and CFRbolus (rho = 0.37, p < 0.001, ICC 0.228 [0.055–0.389]). When assessed at CFR cut-off values of 2.0 and 2.5, the methods disagreed in 41 (35 %) and 45 (39 %) of cases, respectively.

Conclusions: There is a significant difference and weak agreement between bolus and continuous thermodilution-derived indices, which must be considered when diagnosing CMD in ACS and CCS patients.

Publication status:
Published
Peer review status:
Peer reviewed

Actions

Access Document

Files:
Publisher copy:
10.1016/j.ijcha.2024.101374

Authors

More by this author
Role:
Author
ORCID:
0000-0002-0150-6199
More by this author
Institution:
University of Oxford
Division:
MSD
Department:
Radcliffe Department of Medicine
Sub department:
RDM-Division of Cardiovascular Medicine
Role:
Author
More by this author
Institution:
University of Oxford
Division:
MSD
Department:
Radcliffe Department of Medicine
Sub department:
RDM-Division of Cardiovascular Medicine
Role:
Author

Contributors


More from this funder
Funder identifier:
https://ror.org/02wdwnk04
Grant:
CH/16/1/32013
RE/13/1/30181


Publisher:
Elsevier
Journal:
IJC Heart and Vasculature More from this journal
Volume:
51
Article number:
101374
Publication date:
2024-03-08
Acceptance date:
2024-02-22
DOI:
EISSN:
2352-9067
Pmid:
38496256


Language:
English
Keywords:
Pubs id:
1845556
Local pid:
pubs:1845556
Deposit date:
2025-05-18
ARK identifier:

Terms of use


Views and Downloads






If you are the owner of this record, you can report an update to it here: Report update to this record

TO TOP