Edward T Ha, Samit M Shah, Olga Toleva, Krystyna Bronchard, Kathleen E Kearney, Akl C Fahed, Farouc Jaffer, John E A Blair, Allen Jeremias, Joia Spinelli, Brian A Bergmark, Yuhei Kobayashi
{"title":"Additive Value of Acetylcholine Testing in ANOCA: A US-Based Multicenter FlowLab Study.","authors":"Edward T Ha, Samit M Shah, Olga Toleva, Krystyna Bronchard, Kathleen E Kearney, Akl C Fahed, Farouc Jaffer, John E A Blair, Allen Jeremias, Joia Spinelli, Brian A Bergmark, Yuhei Kobayashi","doi":"10.1002/ccd.70947","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Angina with non-obstructive coronary arteries (ANOCA) is an underrecognized cause of angina with non-universal diagnostic techniques and patient management strategies. Among ANOCA testing, vasospasm provocation is not always performed mainly due to differences in institutional availability.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>Using the FlowLab Study, we quantified vasospasm prevalence among patients with ANOCA at US centers and compared physician decision-making, endotype distribution, and management between sites that did and did not include vasospasm testing in their workup.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The FlowLab Study was a prospective, multicenter, US-based study of patients who were referred for coronary angiography and underwent ANOCA testing using the bolus thermodilution method. Presumed diagnosis before cardiac catheterization and final diagnosis after ANOCA testing were compared between participating sites with or without acetylcholine testing availability.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 253 procedures at 14 US sites were included in this study. There were 155 procedures among sites performing spasm provocation testing and 98 procedures among sites not performing spasm provocation testing. Prior to cardiac catheterization, sites with spasm provocation testing were less likely to suspect epicardial coronary artery disease as the cause of angina compared to sites without (27% vs. 59.2%, p < 0.0001). A diagnosis of CMD was made more frequently at sites performing spasm testing compared to sites not performing spasm testing (68% vs. 29.6%, p < 0.0001). Similarly, among 125 patients who underwent spasm provocation testing, diagnostic yield increased from 34.4% with bolus thermodilution alone to 84.8% after the addition of spasm provocation testing (p < 0.001). In these patients, intensification involving calcium channel blockers was more frequent with epicardial (67%) and microvascular spasm (41%) than without spasm (24%, p = 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In contemporary US practice, adding spasm provocation testing to bolus thermodilution more than doubled diagnostic yield and was followed by medication changes directed toward the diagnosed endotype. Differences between sites with and without spasm testing also reflected variation in procedural practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":520583,"journal":{"name":"Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.70947","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Angina with non-obstructive coronary arteries (ANOCA) is an underrecognized cause of angina with non-universal diagnostic techniques and patient management strategies. Among ANOCA testing, vasospasm provocation is not always performed mainly due to differences in institutional availability.
Aims: Using the FlowLab Study, we quantified vasospasm prevalence among patients with ANOCA at US centers and compared physician decision-making, endotype distribution, and management between sites that did and did not include vasospasm testing in their workup.
Methods: The FlowLab Study was a prospective, multicenter, US-based study of patients who were referred for coronary angiography and underwent ANOCA testing using the bolus thermodilution method. Presumed diagnosis before cardiac catheterization and final diagnosis after ANOCA testing were compared between participating sites with or without acetylcholine testing availability.
Results: A total of 253 procedures at 14 US sites were included in this study. There were 155 procedures among sites performing spasm provocation testing and 98 procedures among sites not performing spasm provocation testing. Prior to cardiac catheterization, sites with spasm provocation testing were less likely to suspect epicardial coronary artery disease as the cause of angina compared to sites without (27% vs. 59.2%, p < 0.0001). A diagnosis of CMD was made more frequently at sites performing spasm testing compared to sites not performing spasm testing (68% vs. 29.6%, p < 0.0001). Similarly, among 125 patients who underwent spasm provocation testing, diagnostic yield increased from 34.4% with bolus thermodilution alone to 84.8% after the addition of spasm provocation testing (p < 0.001). In these patients, intensification involving calcium channel blockers was more frequent with epicardial (67%) and microvascular spasm (41%) than without spasm (24%, p = 0.001).
Conclusions: In contemporary US practice, adding spasm provocation testing to bolus thermodilution more than doubled diagnostic yield and was followed by medication changes directed toward the diagnosed endotype. Differences between sites with and without spasm testing also reflected variation in procedural practice.
背景:非阻塞性冠状动脉心绞痛(ANOCA)是一种未被充分认识的心绞痛病因,其诊断技术和患者管理策略并不通用。在ANOCA测试中,血管痉挛诱发并不总是进行,主要是由于机构可用性的差异。目的:使用FlowLab研究,我们量化了美国中心ANOCA患者的血管痉挛患病率,并比较了在检查中进行血管痉挛测试和未进行血管痉挛测试的医院之间的医生决策、内源性分布和管理。方法:FlowLab研究是一项前瞻性的、多中心的、美国的研究,研究对象是接受冠状动脉造影并采用大剂量热稀释法进行ANOCA检测的患者。在有或没有乙酰胆碱检测的参与部位之间比较心导管穿刺前的推定诊断和ANOCA检测后的最终诊断。结果:本研究共纳入了美国14个部位的253例手术。在进行痉挛激发试验的部位有155个程序,在未进行痉挛激发试验的部位有98个程序。在心导管穿刺前,有痉挛激发试验的部位比没有痉挛激发试验的部位更不容易怀疑心外膜冠状动脉疾病是心绞痛的病因(27% vs. 59.2%, p)。结论:在当代美国的实践中,在热稀释剂中加入痉挛激发试验的诊断率增加了一倍以上,随后针对诊断的内源性改变药物。有和没有痉挛测试的部位之间的差异也反映了程序实践的差异。