{"title":"Safety and potential usefulness of sequential intracoronary acetylcholine and ergonovine administration for spasm provocation testing.","authors":"Yasusuke Kinoshita, Yuichi Saito, Yuetsu Kikuta, Katsumasa Sato, Masahito Taniguchi, Kenji Goto, Hideo Takebayashi, Seiichi Haruta, Yoshio Kobayashi","doi":"10.1177/17539447241233168","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Although guidelines recommend intracoronary acetylcholine (ACh) and ergonovine (ER) provocation testing for diagnosis of vasospastic angina, the feasibility and safety of sequential (combined) use of both pharmacological agents during the same catheterization session remain unclear.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>In this study, we investigated the feasibility and safety of sequential intracoronary ACh and ER administration for coronary spasm provocation testing.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study included 235 patients who showed positive results on ACh and ER provocation testing. Initial intracoronary ACh administration was followed by ER administration for left coronary artery (LCA) spasm provocation testing. Subsequently, the right coronary artery (RCA) was subjected to sequential ACh and ER administration for provocation testing. The primary outcome of the study was the safety of sequential intracoronary ACh and ER provocation testing, which was assessed based on a composite of all-cause death, sustained ventricular tachycardia and fibrillation, and cardiogenic shock.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Even in patients with negative results on sequential intracoronary ACh and ER provocation testing in the LCA and only ACh administration into the RCA, additional administration of ER into the RCA showed a positive provocation test result in 33 of 235 (14.0%) patients; three (1.3%) patients developed adverse effects (cardiogenic shock occurred in all cases) during LCA provocation testing. We observed no deaths attributable to spasm provocation testing.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Sequential administration of intracoronary ACh and ER was associated with a relatively low major complication rate and may be safe and potentially useful for diagnosis of vasospastic angina.</p>","PeriodicalId":23035,"journal":{"name":"Therapeutic Advances in Cardiovascular Disease","volume":"18 ","pages":"17539447241233168"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10894506/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Therapeutic Advances in Cardiovascular Disease","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17539447241233168","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Although guidelines recommend intracoronary acetylcholine (ACh) and ergonovine (ER) provocation testing for diagnosis of vasospastic angina, the feasibility and safety of sequential (combined) use of both pharmacological agents during the same catheterization session remain unclear.
Objectives: In this study, we investigated the feasibility and safety of sequential intracoronary ACh and ER administration for coronary spasm provocation testing.
Methods: The study included 235 patients who showed positive results on ACh and ER provocation testing. Initial intracoronary ACh administration was followed by ER administration for left coronary artery (LCA) spasm provocation testing. Subsequently, the right coronary artery (RCA) was subjected to sequential ACh and ER administration for provocation testing. The primary outcome of the study was the safety of sequential intracoronary ACh and ER provocation testing, which was assessed based on a composite of all-cause death, sustained ventricular tachycardia and fibrillation, and cardiogenic shock.
Results: Even in patients with negative results on sequential intracoronary ACh and ER provocation testing in the LCA and only ACh administration into the RCA, additional administration of ER into the RCA showed a positive provocation test result in 33 of 235 (14.0%) patients; three (1.3%) patients developed adverse effects (cardiogenic shock occurred in all cases) during LCA provocation testing. We observed no deaths attributable to spasm provocation testing.
Conclusion: Sequential administration of intracoronary ACh and ER was associated with a relatively low major complication rate and may be safe and potentially useful for diagnosis of vasospastic angina.
背景:尽管指南推荐冠状动脉内乙酰胆碱(ACh)和麦角新碱(ER)激惹试验用于诊断血管痉挛性心绞痛,但在同一次导管检查中连续(联合)使用这两种药剂的可行性和安全性仍不清楚:本研究探讨了冠状动脉内 ACh 和 ER 顺序用于冠状动脉痉挛激发试验的可行性和安全性:研究纳入了 235 名 ACh 和 ER 兴奋试验结果呈阳性的患者。在进行左冠状动脉(LCA)痉挛激发试验时,首先冠状动脉内注射 ACh,然后注射 ER。随后,对右冠状动脉(RCA)依次进行 ACh 和 ER 诱发试验。研究的主要结果是冠状动脉内 ACh 和 ER 顺序激发试验的安全性,根据全因死亡、持续室速和室颤以及心源性休克的综合情况进行评估:即使在 LCA 顺序冠状动脉内 ACh 和 ER 激发试验结果为阴性且仅在 RCA 中注射 ACh 的患者中,235 例患者中有 33 例(14.0%)在 RCA 中额外注射 ER 后,激发试验结果呈阳性;在 LCA 激发试验期间,有 3 例患者(1.3%)出现不良反应(所有病例均发生心源性休克)。我们没有观察到因痉挛激发试验导致的死亡:结论:冠状动脉内 ACh 和 ER 顺序给药的主要并发症发生率相对较低,可能对血管痉挛性心绞痛的诊断安全且有用。
期刊介绍:
The journal is aimed at clinicians and researchers from the cardiovascular disease field and will be a forum for all views and reviews relating to this discipline.Topics covered will include: ·arteriosclerosis ·cardiomyopathies ·coronary artery disease ·diabetes ·heart failure ·hypertension ·metabolic syndrome ·obesity ·peripheral arterial disease ·stroke ·arrhythmias ·genetics