Clinical implications of non-hyperemic pressure ratio and change in Pd/Pa to evaluate coronary microvascular dysfunction in patients with angina and non-obstructive coronary arteries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background A reduced coronary flow reserve (CFR) in patients with angina and non-obstructive coronary arteries (ANOCA) harbors coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMD). Recent studies classify CMD into structural and functional subtypes based on an IMR threshold of ≥25 or <25mmHg·sec. Given its phenotypic variations, clinical needs exist to develop a better approach for evaluating phenotypes of CMD. The wire-based non-hyperemic pressure ratio (NHPR) has been reported to correlate with CFR. Additionally, we reported change in Pd/Pa during hyperemia [(Pd/Pa at rest – Pd/Pa at hyperemia (=fractional flow reserve, FFR)] as a novel measure associated with microvascular reactivity. We hypothesized that these two measures may help differentiate CMD subtypes in ANOCA. Purpose To evaluate the association of NHPR and change in Pd/Pa with CMD phenotypes in ANOCA. Methods The current study investigated 112 patients with anginal chest pain. Pressure-wire was used to measure coronary physiological indices (CFR, IMR, NHPR, FFR, and the change in Pd/Pa) in 112 coronary arteries with <50% stenosis (LAD/non-LAD=108/4) (Figure 1). Clinical characteristics and physiological indices were compared in subjects stratified into CMD and non-CMD groups according to a CFR threshold of <2.5 or ≥2.5. Results 34% (=38/112) of study subjects presented CMD, including 6 structural and 32 functional CMD (Figure 1). Patients with CMD were more likely to be female (58% vs. 38%, P=0.04) with a greater frequency of ACS (37% vs. 15%, P=0.008) and hypertension (87% vs. 66%, P=0.02). On physiological analysis, patients with CMD exhibited lower NHPR (0.88 vs. 0.92, P<0.001) and CFR (1.6 vs. 4.7, P<0.001) but higher IMR (17.9 vs. 11.8 mmHg·sec, P=0.02), whereas the change in Pd/Pa was similar (0.08 vs. 0.08, P=0.80). (Table 1). Multivariable analysis demonstrated NHPR (OR=1.25, 95%CI=1.10-1.42, P<0.001) and female (OR=2.84, 95%CI=1.12-7.20, P=0.03) as independent factors associated with CFR<2.5 (Table 2A). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis showed NHPR≤0.89 optimally predicted CFR<2.5 (AUC=0.74, P<0.001, sensitivity=78%, specificity=62%) and was more prevalent in functional CMD (P<0.001, Figure 3A). Further analysis identified change in Pd/Pa as an independent predictor of IMR≥25mmHg·sec (OR=1.24, 95% CI=1.02–1.51, P=0.04) (Table 2B). ROC analysis showed change in Pd/Pa≤0.08 as an optimal cut-off value to predict IMR≥25mmHg·sec (AUC=0.69, P=0.03, sensitivity=36%, specificity=100%). In contrast to NHPR, a greater frequency of change in Pd/Pa≤0.08 was observed in patients with structural than functional CMD (Figure 3B). Conclusion In ANOCA patients, reduced NHPR was a potential physiological measure of CMD, especially in functional CMD. In contrast, structural CMD was characterized as a reduced change in Pd/Pa. These observations indicate NHPR and change in Pd/Pa as potential measures to stratify CMD and then select optimal therapeutic management in the setting of ANOCA.Figure 1 and Table 1 Table 2 and Figure 2
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".