MbrlCatalogueTitleDetail

Do you wish to reserve the book?
Comparison of the Diagnostic Yield of Intracoronary Acetylcholine Infusion and Acetylcholine Bolus Injection Protocols During Invasive Coronary Function Testing
Comparison of the Diagnostic Yield of Intracoronary Acetylcholine Infusion and Acetylcholine Bolus Injection Protocols During Invasive Coronary Function Testing
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
You are currently in the queue to collect this book. You will be notified once it is your turn to collect the book.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Comparison of the Diagnostic Yield of Intracoronary Acetylcholine Infusion and Acetylcholine Bolus Injection Protocols During Invasive Coronary Function Testing
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Title added to your shelf!
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Do you wish to request the book?
Comparison of the Diagnostic Yield of Intracoronary Acetylcholine Infusion and Acetylcholine Bolus Injection Protocols During Invasive Coronary Function Testing
Comparison of the Diagnostic Yield of Intracoronary Acetylcholine Infusion and Acetylcholine Bolus Injection Protocols During Invasive Coronary Function Testing

Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
How would you like to get it?
We have requested the book for you! Sorry the robot delivery is not available at the moment
We have requested the book for you!
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Comparison of the Diagnostic Yield of Intracoronary Acetylcholine Infusion and Acetylcholine Bolus Injection Protocols During Invasive Coronary Function Testing
Comparison of the Diagnostic Yield of Intracoronary Acetylcholine Infusion and Acetylcholine Bolus Injection Protocols During Invasive Coronary Function Testing
Journal Article

Comparison of the Diagnostic Yield of Intracoronary Acetylcholine Infusion and Acetylcholine Bolus Injection Protocols During Invasive Coronary Function Testing

2024
Request Book From Autostore and Choose the Collection Method
Overview
Coronary endothelial dysfunction (CED) and coronary artery spasm (CAS) are causes of angina with no obstructive coronary arteries in patients. Both can be diagnosed by invasive coronary function testing (ICFT) using acetylcholine (ACh). This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic yield of a 3-minute ACh infusion as compared with a 1-minute ACh bolus injection protocol in testing CED and CAS. We evaluated 220 consecutive patients with angina and no obstructive coronary arteries who underwent ICFT using continuous Doppler flow measurements. Per protocol, 110 patients were tested using 3-minute infusion, and thereafter 110 patients using 1-minute bolus injections, because of a protocol change. CED was defined as a <50% increase in coronary blood flow or any epicardial vasoconstriction in reaction to low-dose ACh and CAS according to the Coronary Vasomotor Disorders International Study Group (COVADIS) criteria, both with and without T-wave abnormalities, in reaction to high dose ACh. The prevalence of CED was equal in both protocols (78% vs 79%, p = 0.869). Regarding the endotypes of CAS according to COVADIS, the equivocal endotype was diagnosed less often in the 3 vs 1-minute protocol (24% vs 44%, p = 0.004). Including T-wave abnormalities in the COVADIS criteria resulted in a similar diagnostic yield of both protocols. Hemodynamic changes from baseline to the low or high ACh doses were comparable between the protocols for each endotype. In conclusion, ICFT using 3-minute infusion or 1-minute bolus injections of ACh showed a similar diagnostic yield of CED. When using the COVADIS criteria, a difference in the equivocal diagnosis was observed. Including T-wave abnormalities as a diagnostic criterion reclassified equivocal test results into CAS and decreased this difference. For clinical practice, we recommend the inclusion of T-wave abnormalities as a diagnostic criterion for CAS and the 1-minute bolus protocol for practicality.