Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15466646›Full record

ArticleCirculation2004

Epicardial stenosis severity does not affect minimal microcirculatory resistance.

Wilbert Aarnoudse, William F Fearon, Ganesh Manoharan, Maartje Geven, Frans van de Vosse, Marcel Rutten, Bernard De Bruyne, Nico H J Pijls

5 registry-linked trialsAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Circulation, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 5 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 78 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
78citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT05392959 phase4terminatedstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

Effect of the Antidiabetic Drug DAPAgliflozin on the Coronary Macrovascular and MICROvascular Function in Type 2 Diabetic Patients

Ran2022Enrolled4Registered outcomes3Posted comparisons0ConditionsDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2ArmsDapagliflozin 10 mg Tab, Placebo
PMID 20609968PMID 25538310PMID 25488697PMID 28254770PMID 21126613PMID 20566676PMID 19144937PMID 14972422PMID 12821539PMID 11705815PMID 11447079PMID 11208673other papers from this trial
Open the trial in the graph
NCT03087175 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2016, after this paper: background citation

Impact of Polyethylene Terephthalate Micronet Mesh-Covered Stent (MGuard) on Coronary Microcirculation's Lesions in Patients With ST or Non ST-segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction (STE and NSTE-ACS): Assessment by Index of Microcirculatory Resistance (IMR)

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity Hospital, GrenobleRan2016 to 2019Enrolled52ConditionsCoronary Disease, Coronary Artery Disease, Coronary Atherosclerosis, Cardiovascular DiseasesArmsMGuard stent, Drug eluting stent and bare metal stent
NCT05009667 completednot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

A Prospective, Multi-center Clinical Trial for Evaluating the Effectiveness and Safety of Coronary Angiography-Derived Index of Microcirculatory Resistance Measured Online by a Coronary Functional Measurement System

TypeobservationalSponsorGe JunboRan2021 to 2021Enrolled116ConditionsCoronary Microvascular DysfunctionArmsAngiography-derived Index of Microcirculatory Resistance, Pressure wire-based Index of Microcirculatory Resistance
NCT06294730 completednot on this mapstarted 2019, after this paper: background citation

Coronary Microcirculation and Troponin Elevation in Septic Shock

TypeobservationalSponsorKarolinska InstitutetRan2019 to 2025Enrolled62ConditionsSepsis, Myocardial Injury, Coronary Microvascular Dysfunction, Endothelial Dysfunction
NCT06306066 completednot on this mapstarted 2015, after this paper: background citation

Coronary Microvascular Dysfunction in Chronic Coronary Syndrome - Invasive Assessment With Thermo-dilution Technique in the LAD and Biobanking in an All-comer Population

TypeobservationalSponsorKarolinska InstitutetRan2015 to 2022Enrolled505ConditionsCoronary Artery Disease, Microvascular Angina, Coronary Microvascular Dysfunction
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

78 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review

18 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Wilbert AarnoudseDepartment of Cardiology, Catharina Hospital Eindhoven, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
William F Fearon
Ganesh Manoharan
Maartje Geven
Frans van de Vosse
Marcel Rutten
Bernard De Bruyne
Nico H J Pijls

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhether minimal microvascular resistance of the myocardium is affected by the presence of an epicardial stenosis is controversial. Recently, an index of microcirculatory resistance (IMR) was developed that is based on combined measurements of distal coronary pressure and thermodilution-derived mean transit time. In normal coronary arteries, IMR correlates well with true microvascular resistance. However, to be applicable in the case of an epicardial stenosis, IMR should account for collateral flow. We investigated the feasibility of determining IMR in humans and tested the hypothesis that microvascular resistance is independent of epicardial stenosis. METHODS AND

resultsThirty patients scheduled for percutaneous coronary intervention were studied. The stenosis was stented with a pressure guidewire, and coronary wedge pressure (P(w)) was measured during balloon occlusion. After successful stenting, a short compliant balloon with a diameter 1.0 mm smaller than the stent was placed in the stented segment and inflated with increasing pressures, creating a 10%, 50%, and 75% area stenosis. At each of the 3 degrees of stenosis, fractional flow reserve (FFR) and IMR were measured at steady-state maximum hyperemia induced by intravenous adenosine. A total of 90 measurements were performed in 30 patients. When uncorrected for P(w), an apparent increase in microvascular resistance was observed with increasing stenosis severity (IMR=24, 27, and 37 U for the 3 different degrees of stenosis; P<0.001). In contrast, when P(w) is appropriately accounted for, microvascular resistance did not change with stenosis severity (IMR=22, 23, and 23 U, respectively; P=0.28).

conclusionsMinimal microvascular resistance does not change with epicardial stenosis severity, and IMR is a specific index of microvascular resistance when collateral flow is properly taken into account.

Indexed as

Coronary CirculationVascular ResistanceAgedAngioplasty, Balloon, CoronaryCardiac CatheterizationCollateral CirculationConstriction, PathologicCoronary StenosisFemaleHumansMaleMicrocirculationMiddle AgedPericardiumPressureThermodilution

Identifiers

PMID15466646

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.