Multiparametric analysis of coronary flow in psoriasis using a coronary flow reserve companion

Background Coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMD) is usually evaluated measuring coronary flow velocity reserve (CFVR). A more comprehensive analysis of CFVR including additional consideration of the associated logical companion‐CFVR, where hyperemic diastolic coronary flow velocity may act as sur...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:European journal of clinical investigation 2022-04, Vol.52 (4), p.e13711-n/a
Hauptverfasser: Tona, Francesco, Osto, Elena, Kerkhof, Peter L. M., Montisci, Roberta, Famoso, Giulia, Lorenzoni, Giulia, De Michieli, Laura, Cecere, Annagrazia, Zanetti, Irene, Civieri, Giovanni, Iliceto, Sabino, Piaserico, Stefano
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Background Coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMD) is usually evaluated measuring coronary flow velocity reserve (CFVR). A more comprehensive analysis of CFVR including additional consideration of the associated logical companion‐CFVR, where hyperemic diastolic coronary flow velocity may act as surrogate, was applied in this study to elucidate the mechanism of CMD in psoriasis. Methods and results Coronary flow velocity reserve was analysed using transthoracic echocardiographs of 127 psoriasis patients (age 36 ± 8 years; 104 males) and of 52 sex‐ and age‐matched healthy controls. CFVR determination was repeated in the patient subgroup (n = 78) receiving anti‐inflammatory therapy. Baseline and hyperemic microvascular resistance (MR) were calculated. CMD was defined as CFVR ≤ 2.5. Four endotypes of CMD were identified referring to concordant or discordant impairments of hyperemic flow or CFVR. We evaluated the companion‐CFVR, as derived from the quadratic mean of hyperemic and diastolic flow velocity at rest. Coronary flow parameters, including CFVR (p = 0.01), were different among the two endotypes having CFVR > 2.5. Specifically, all 11 (14%) patients with CFVR deterioration despite therapy, belonged to endotype 1, and had higher baseline and hyperemic MR (p 
ISSN:0014-2972
1365-2362
DOI:10.1111/eci.13711