Kop WJ, Krantz DS, Howell RH, Ferguson MA, Papademetriou V, Lu D, Popma JJ, Quigley JF, Vernalis M, Gottdiener JS. Effects of mental stress on coronary epicardial vasomotion and flow velocity in coronary artery disease: relationship with hemodynamic stress responses.
J Am Coll Cardiol 2001;
37:1359-66. [PMID:
11300447 DOI:
10.1016/s0735-1097(01)01136-6]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 87] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/18/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES
This study examines the prevalence and hemodynamic determinants of mental stress-induced coronary vasoconstriction in patients undergoing diagnostic coronary angiography.
BACKGROUND
Decreased myocardial supply is involved in myocardial ischemia triggered by mental stress, but the determinants of stress-induced coronary constriction and flow velocity responses are not well understood.
METHODS
Coronary vasomotion was assessed in 76 patients (average age 59.9 +/- 10.4 years; eight women). Coronary flow velocity responses were assessed in 20 of the 76 patients using intracoronary Doppler flow. Repeated angiograms were obtained after a baseline control period, a 3-min mental arithmetic task and administration of 200 microg intracoronary nitroglycerin. Arterial blood pressure (BP) and heart rate assessments were made throughout the procedure.
RESULTS
Mental stress resulted in significant BP and heart rate increases (p < 0.001). Coronary constriction (>0.15 mm) was observed in 11 of 59 patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) (18.6%). Higher mental stress pressor responses were associated with more constriction in diseased segments (rdeltaSBP = -0.26, rdeltaDBP = -0.30, rdeltaMAP = -0.29; p's < 0.05) but not with responses in nonstenotic segments. The overall constriction of diseased segments was not significant (p > 0.10), whereas a small but significant constriction occurred in nonstenotic segments (p = 0.04). Coronary flow velocity increased in patients without CAD (32.2%; p = 0.008), but not in patients with CAD (6.4%; p = ns). Cardiovascular risk factors were not predictive of stress-induced vasomotion in patients with CAD.
CONCLUSIONS
Coronary vasoconstriction in angiographically diseased arteries varies with hemodynamic responses to mental arousal. Coronary flow responses are attenuated in CAD patients. Thus, combined increases in cardiac demand and concomitant reduced myocardial blood supply may contribute to myocardial ischemia with mental stress.
Collapse