Safety and prognostic relevance of acetylcholine testing in patients with stable myocardial ischaemia or myocardial infarction and non-obstructive coronary arteries.

BACKGROUND Intracoronary provocation testing with acetylcholine (ACh) is crucial for the diagnosis of functional coronary alterations in patients with suspected myocardial ischaemia and non-obstructive coronary arteries. AIMS Our intention was to assess the safety and predictive value for major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) in patients presenting with ischaemia with non-obstructive coronary arteries (INOCA) or with myocardial infarction with non-obstructive coronary arteries (MINOCA). METHODS We prospectively enrolled consecutive INOCA or MINOCA patients undergoing intracoronary ACh provocation testing. RESULTS A total of 317 patients were enrolled: 174 (54.9%) with INOCA and 143 (45.1%) with MINOCA. Of these, 185 patients (58.4%) had a positive response to the ACh test. Complications during ACh provocative testing were all mild and transient and occurred in 29 (9.1%) patients, with no difference between patients with positive or negative responses to ACh testing, nor between INOCA and MINOCA patients. A history of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, moderate/severe diastolic dysfunction and a higher QT dispersion at baseline electrocardiogram were independent predictors of complications. MACCE occurred in 30 patients (9.5%) during a median follow-up of 22 months. The incidence of MACCE was higher among patients with a positive ACh test (24 [13.0%] vs 6 [4.5%], p=0.017), and a positive ACh test was an independent predictor of MACCE. CONCLUSIONS ACh provocation testing is associated with a low risk of mild and transient complications, with a similar prevalence in both INOCA and MINOCA patients. Importantly, ACh provocation testing can help to identify patients at higher risk of future clinical events, suggesting a net clinical benefit derived from its use in this clinical setting.

[1]  G. Niccoli,et al.  The central role of invasive functional coronary assessment for patients with ischemic heart disease. , 2021, International journal of cardiology.

[2]  G. Niccoli,et al.  Coronary provocative tests in the catheterization laboratory: Pathophysiological bases, methodological considerations and clinical implications. , 2020, Atherosclerosis.

[3]  Deepak L. Bhatt,et al.  2020 ESC Guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation. , 2020, European heart journal.

[4]  U. Sechtem,et al.  Safety assessment and results of coronary spasm provocation testing in patients with myocardial infarction with unobstructed coronary arteries compared to patients with stable angina and unobstructed coronary arteries. , 2020, European heart journal. Acute cardiovascular care.

[5]  Marco Valgimigli,et al.  2019 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of chronic coronary syndromes. , 2019, European heart journal.

[6]  A. M. Leone,et al.  Clinical, angiographic and echocardiographic correlates of epicardial and microvascular spasm in patients with myocardial ischaemia and non-obstructive coronary arteries , 2019, Clinical Research in Cardiology.

[7]  Christopher J. Rush,et al.  Stratified Medical Therapy Using Invasive Coronary Function Testing in Angina: The CorMicA Trial. , 2018, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[8]  Yoshio Kobayashi,et al.  Safety and usefulness of acetylcholine provocation test in patients with no culprit lesions on emergency coronary angiography. , 2018, International journal of cardiology.

[9]  G. Niccoli,et al.  Patients with acute myocardial infarction and non-obstructive coronary arteries: safety and prognostic relevance of invasive coronary provocative tests , 2017, European heart journal.

[10]  Hiroaki Shimokawa,et al.  International standardization of diagnostic criteria for microvascular angina. , 2018, International journal of cardiology.

[11]  J. Kaski,et al.  Safety of intracoronary provocative testing for the diagnosis of coronary artery spasm. , 2017, International journal of cardiology.

[12]  D. Atar,et al.  ESC working group position paper on myocardial infarction with non-obstructive coronary arteries. , 2016, European heart journal.

[13]  F. Crea,et al.  International standardization of diagnostic criteria for vasospastic angina , 2015, European heart journal.

[14]  Yoshio Kobayashi,et al.  Paroxysmal atrial fibrillation during intracoronary acetylcholine provocation test , 2017, Heart and Vessels.

[15]  M. Slavich,et al.  Coronary artery spasm: Current knowledge and residual uncertainties☆ , 2016, International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature.

[16]  U. Sechtem,et al.  Pharmacotherapy for coronary microvascular dysfunction. , 2015, European heart journal. Cardiovascular pharmacotherapy.

[17]  C. Merz,et al.  Provocative testing for coronary reactivity and spasm. , 2014, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[18]  H. Shimokawa,et al.  Clinical implications of provocation tests for coronary artery spasm: safety, arrhythmic complications, and prognostic impact: multicentre registry study of the Japanese Coronary Spasm Association. , 2013, European Heart Journal.

[19]  H. Yoshino,et al.  Left ventricular dysfunction due to diffuse multiple vessel coronary artery spasm can be concealed in dilated cardiomyopathy , 2012, European journal of heart failure.

[20]  A. Camm,et al.  Guidelines for the management of atrial fibrillation: the Task Force for the Management of Atrial Fibrillation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). , 2010, European heart journal.

[21]  Vias Markides,et al.  Atrial fibrillation: classification, pathophysiology, mechanisms and drug treatment , 2003, Heart.

[22]  S. Chierchia,et al.  "Variant" angina: one aspect of a continuous spectrum of vasospastic myocardial ischemia. Pathogenetic mechanisms, estimated incidence and clinical and coronary arteriographic findings in 138 patients. , 1978, The American journal of cardiology.