Patients with reduced heart rate response to adenosine infusion have low myocardial flow reserve in (13)N-ammonia PET studies

Relationship between heart rate response and cardiac innervation in patients with suspected or known coronary artery disease

BACKGROUND

Chronotropic response to pharmacological stress test is blunted in patients with autonomic neuropathy. The relationship between heart rate (HR) changes during pharmacological stress test and cardiac autonomic dysfunction has not been fully investigated. We assessed the potential interplay between HR response (HRR) and myocardial innervation in patients with suspected or known coronary artery disease (CAD).

METHODS AND RESULTS

We studied 71 patients with suspected or known CAD referred to pharmacological stress myocardial perfusion imaging and 123I metaiodobenzylguanidine (123I-MIBG) cardiac scintigraphy. HRR was calculated as the maximum percent change from baseline according to the formula: (peak HR - rest HR)/rest HR × 100. 123I-MIBG heart-to-mediastinum (H/M) ratio was calculated and a late H/M ratio < 1.6 was considered abnormal. HRR progressively decreased with decreasing late H/M ratio (P for trend = 0.02) and a significant correlation between HRR and late H/M ratio (P = 0.03) was observed. The addition of HRR to a model including age, diabetes, known CAD, left ventricular ejection fraction, and stress-induced ischemia added incremental value in predicting an abnormal late H/M ratio, increasing the global chi-square from 8.09 to 13.8 (P = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

The relationship between HRR and cardiac sympathetic innervation in patients with suspected or known CAD confirms a strong interplay between cardiac response to stress tests and cardiac autonomic activation. This finding suggests that HRR may be used as a surrogate for assessing cardiac sympathetic function.

A comparison of standard and high dose adenosine protocols in routine vasodilator stress cardiovascular magnetic resonance: dosage affects hyperaemic myocardial blood flow in patients with severe left ventricular systolic impairment

BACKGROUND

Adenosine stress perfusion cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) is commonly used in the assessment of patients with suspected ischaemia. Accepted protocols recommend administration of adenosine at a dose of 140 µg/kg/min increased up to 210 µg/kg/min if required. Conventionally, adequate stress has been assessed using change in heart rate, however, recent studies have suggested that these peripheral measurements may not reflect hyperaemia and can be blunted, in particular, in patients with heart failure. This study looked to compare stress myocardial blood flow (MBF) and haemodynamic response with different dosing regimens of adenosine during stress perfusion CMR in patients and healthy controls.

METHODS

20 healthy adult subjects were recruited as controls to compare 3 adenosine perfusion protocols: standard dose (140 µg/kg/min for 4 min), high dose (210 µg/kg/min for 4 min) and long dose (140 µg/kg/min for 8 min). 60 patients with either known or suspected coronary artery disease (CAD) or with heart failure and different degrees of left ventricular (LV) dysfunction underwent adenosine stress with standard and high dose adenosine within the same scan. All studies were carried out on a 3 T CMR scanner. Quantitative global myocardial perfusion and haemodynamic response were compared between doses.

RESULTS

In healthy controls, no significant difference was seen in stress MBF between the 3 protocols. In patients with known or suspected CAD, and those with heart failure and mild systolic impairment (LV ejection fraction (LVEF) ≥ 40%) no significant difference was seen in stress MBF between standard and high dose adenosine. In those with LVEF < 40%, there was a significantly higher stress MBF following high dose adenosine compared to standard dose (1.33 ± 0.46 vs 1.10 ± 0.47 ml/g/min, p = 0.004). Non-responders to standard dose adenosine (defined by an increase in heart rate (HR) < 10 bpm) had a significantly higher stress HR following high dose (75 ± 12 vs 70 ± 14 bpm, p = 0.034), but showed no significant difference in stress MBF.

CONCLUSIONS

Increasing adenosine dose from 140 to 210 µg/kg/min leads to increased stress MBF in patients with significantly impaired LV systolic function. Adenosine dose in clinical perfusion assessment may need to be increased in these patients.

Heart rate reserve is a long-term risk predictor in women undergoing myocardial perfusion imaging

BACKGROUND

Although women with cardiovascular disease experience relatively worse outcomes as compared to men, substantial knowledge gaps remain regarding the unique female determinants of cardiovascular risk. Heart rate (HR) responses to vasodilator stress mirror autonomic activity and may carry important long-term prognostic information in women.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Hemodynamic changes during adenosine stress were recorded in a total of 508 consecutive patients (104 women) undergoing clinically indicated ¹³N-ammonia Positron-Emission-Tomography (PET) at our institution. Following propensity matching, 202 patients (101 women, mean age 61.3 ± 12.6 years) were analyzed. During a median follow-up of 5.6 years, 97 patients had at least one cardiac event, including 17 cardiac deaths. Heart rate reserve (% HRR) during adenosine infusion was significantly higher in women as compared to men (23.8 ± 19.5 vs 17.3 ± 15.3, p = 0.009). A strong association between 10-year cardiovascular endpoints and a blunted HRR was observed in women, while this association was less pronounced in men. Accordingly, in women, but not in men, reduced HRR was selected as a strong predictor for adverse cardiovascular events in a Cox regression model fully adjusted for imaging findings and traditional risk factors (HR 2.41, 95% CI 1.23-4.75, p = 0.011). Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves revealed that a blunted HRR <21% was a powerful predictor for MACE in women with a sensitivity of 77% and a specificity of 68%.

CONCLUSION

Blunted HRR to adenosine stress adds incremental prognostic value for long-term cardiovascular outcomes in women beyond that provided by traditional risk factors and imaging findings.

Heart rate reserve during pharmacological stress is a significant negative predictor of impaired coronary flow reserve in women

PURPOSE

Evidence to date has failed to adequately explore determinants of cardiovascular risk in women with coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMVD). Heart rate responses to adenosine mirror autonomic activity and may carry important prognostic information for the diagnosis of CMVD.

METHODS

Hemodynamic changes during adenosine stress were analyzed in a propensity-matched cohort of 404 patients (202 women, mean age 65.9 ± 11.0) who underwent clinically indicated myocardial perfusion ¹³N-ammonia Positron-Emission-Tomography (PET) at our institution between September 2013 and May 2017.

RESULTS

Baseline heart rate (HR) was significantly higher in patients with abnormal coronary flow reserve (CFR, p < 0.001 vs normal CFR). Accordingly, a blunted HR response to adenosine (=reduced heart rate reserve, %HRR) was seen in patients with abnormal CFR, with a most pronounced effect being observed in female patients free of myocardial ischemia (45.9 ± 34.9 vs 26.5 ± 18.0, p < 0.001 in women and 29.1 ± 16.9 vs 24.3 ± 21.7, p = 0.15 in men). Hence, a fully-adjusted multivariate logistic regression model identified HRR as the strongest negative predictor of reduced CFR in women free of myocardial ischemia, but not in men. Accordingly, receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves for the presence of reduced CFR revealed that a %HRR <35 was a powerful predictor for abnormal CFR with a sensitivity of 81% and a specificity of 60% in women.

CONCLUSION

A blunted HRR <35% is associated with abnormal CFR in women. Taking into account HR responses during stress test in women may help to risk stratify the heterogeneous female population of patients with non-obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD).

Adenosine for postoperative analgesia: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Purpose

Perioperative infusion of adenosine has been suggested to reduce the requirement for inhalation anesthetics, without causing serious adverse effects in humans. We conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials evaluating the effect of adenosine on postoperative analgesia.

Methods

We retrieved articles in computerized searches of Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases, up to July 2016. We used adenosine, postoperative analgesia, and postoperative pain(s) as key words, with humans, RCT, and CCT as filters. Data of eligible studies were extracted, which included pain scores, cumulative opioid consumption, adverse reactions, and vital signs. Overall incidence rates, relative risk (RR), and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated employing fixed-effects or random-effects models, depending on the heterogeneity of the included trials.

Results

In total, 757 patients from 9 studies were included. The overall effect of adenosine on postoperative VAS/VRS scores and postoperative opioid consumption was not significantly different from that of controls (P >0.1). The occurrence of PONV and pruritus was not statistically significantly different between an adenosine and nonremifentanil subgroup (P >0.1), but the rate of PONV occurrence was greater in the remifentanil subgroup (P <0.01). Time to first postoperative analgesic requirement in the adenosine group was not significantly difference from that of the saline group (SMD = 0.07, 95%CI: −0.28 to 0.41, P = 0.71); but this occurred significantly later than with remifentanil (SMD = 1.10, 95%CI: 2.48 to 4.06, P < 0.01). Time to hospital discharge was not significantly different between the control and adenosine groups (P = 0.78). The perioperative systolic blood pressure was significantly lower in the adenosine than in the control group in the mannitol subgroup (P < 0.01). The incidence of bradycardia, transient first- degree atrioventricular block, and tachycardia was not significantly different between the adenosine and control groups (P > 0.1).

Conclusion

Adenosine has no analgesic effect or prophylactic effect against PONV, but reduce systolic blood pressure and heart rates. Adenosine may benefit patients with hypertension, ischemic heart disease, and tachyarrhythmia, thereby improving cardiac function.