ArticleAnnals of transplantation2025
Invasive Coronary Physiology Assessment for Detecting Microcirculatory Dysfunction in Heart Transplant Recipients.
Article in Annals of transplantation, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Coronary vasculopathy is one of the most serious late complications after heart transplantation (Htx). The aim of this study was to assess the utility and safety of the invasive assessment of coronary physiology and investigate the occurrence of coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMD) and its association with clinical characteristics of recipients and donors. MATERIAL AND METHODS Coronary microcirculation was assessed during routine coronary angiography, performed prospectively between December 1, 2020, and July 24, 2023, by using index of microcirculatory resistance (IMR) and coronary flow reserve (CFR). Values of IMR ³25 or CFR <2.0 confirmed CMD. RESULTS Thirty-three patients aged 49±14 years were included; 21 (64%) were men. CMD was found in 8 (24%) patients. There were no complications, and examination was performed in all patients. The median values for IMR and CFR were 13 [IQR: 10-20] and 3.6 [IQR: 2.2-4.9], respectively. CMD was more common in younger patients: 40±16 vs 51±13 years (P=0.045), and those with lower BMI: 22±4 vs 26±4 kg/m² (P=0.016). Patients with CMD were more likely to require pacemaker implantation, with 3 (38%) vs 1 (4%) in the post-transplant period (P=0.012). The median time since Htx was 2 [IQR: 2-10] years and was higher in the CMD group: 9.5 [IQR: 6-16] vs 2 [IQR: 1-8] years, (P=0.042). There were no significant differences in other recipient and donor characteristics. CONCLUSIONS Invasive assessment of coronary physiology was safe and effective and diagnosed CMD in nearly one-fourth of heart transplant recipients. CMD is related to age, time since transplantation, and chronotropic graft dysfunction.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
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.