4.7 Article

Pressure-derived collateral flow index as a parameter of microvascular dysfunction in acute myocardial infarction

Journal

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY
Volume 38, Issue 5, Pages 1383-1389

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/S0735-1097(01)01585-6

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives The goal of this study was to examine the implications of the pressure-derived collateral flow index (CFIp) in acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Background Higher CFIp is associated with less severe myocardial ischemia during angioplasty in the non-infarcted heart. It remains unknown whether CFIp also identifies collateral function in AMI patients with and without no-reflow phenomenon. Methods The study population included 48 patients with a first AMI. After successful percutaneous transluminal coronary, angioplasty (PTCA) stent, we measured mean aortic pressure (Pa), central venous pressure (Pv) and coronary wedge pressure (Pew) of the infarct-related artery to calculate: CFIp = (Pcw - Pv)/(Pa - Pv). Myocardial contrast echocardiography (MCE) was performed with the intracoronary, injection of microbubbles to assess myocardial perfusion. Left ventriculograms at days 1 and 28 were provided for the measurement of the regional wall motion (RWM, SD/chord). Results There was no difference in CFIp among subsets based on angiographic collateral grades (grade 0, 1, 2, 3; 0.28 +/-0.07, 0.27 +/-0.09, 0.27 +/-0.08, 0.23 +/-0.08, p=NS). The CFIp was significantly higher in patients with NICE no-reflow (n=16) than in those with MCE reflow (n=32) (0.34 +/-0.07 vs. 0.23 +/-0.06, p<0.01). There was a significant inverse correlation between the extent of functional improvement (RWM[28 d-1 d]) and CFIp (r=0.56, p<0.01), implying that higher CFIp is associated with worse functional improvement. Conclusions In AMI, CFIp is unlikely to reflect collateral function but seems to increase with the severity of microvascular dysfunction. Because higher CFIp was associated with poorer functional recovery, it provides a simple and useful estimate of clinical outcomes in AMI. (J Am Coll Cardiol 2001;38:1383-9) (C) 2001 by the American College of Cardiology.

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