4.7 Article

The prognostic impact of coronary flow-reserve assessed by Doppler echocardiography in non-ischaemic dilated cardiomyopathy

Journal

EUROPEAN HEART JOURNAL
Volume 27, Issue 11, Pages 1319-1323

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehi795

Keywords

coronary flow-reserve; transthoracic echocardiography; prognosis; dipyridamole

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aims Coronary flow-reserve (CFR) can be impaired in non-ischaemic dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM), unmasking a coronary microcirculatory dysfunction of potential prognostic impact. The aim of the present study is to evaluate the prognostic value of Doppler echocardiographic-derived CFR in patients with DCM. Methods and results We evaluated 129 DCM patients (85 mate; age 62 +/- 11) by transthoracic dipyridamole (0.84 mg/kg in 10 min) stress echocardiography. All patients had an ejection fraction < 40% (mean 32 +/- 7) and angiographically normal coronary arteries with NYHA class <= 3. CFR was assessed on left anterior descending artery using pulsed Doppler as the ratio of maximal. peak vasoditation (dipyridamole) to rest diastolic flow velocity. All patients were followed-up for a median of 22 months. Mean CFR was 2.0 +/- 0.5. At individual patient analysis 46 patients had normal (CFR > 2.0) and 83 had abnormal CFR. During follow-up, 18 patients died and 33 showed worsening of NYHA class. The worse event-free survival was observed in those patients with an abnormal CFR when compared with those having a normal CFR at high dose of dipyridamole (70 vs. 22%, at 75 months of follow-up, P < 0.0001). In the multivariable analysis, severity of mitral insufficiency (HR = 1.9, 95% Cl = 1.06-2.87), abnormal CFR (HR = 4.0, 95% Cl = 1.1-15.6), resting wall motion score index (HR = 6.9, 95% Cl = 1.5-30.7) were independent predictors of survival. Conclusion In DCM patients, CFR is often impaired. A reduced CFR during vasodilator stress is an independent prognostic marker of bad prognosis.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available