Adenosine vs Regadenoson Pharmacologic Stress Differs in Women with Suspected Coronary Microvascular Dysfunction: A Report from the Women’s Ischemia Syndrome Evaluation-Coronary Vascular Dysfunction (WISE-CVD) Study

Download Citation in txt Download Citation in bib Download Citation in ris

Author Info

Puja K. Mehta André Rogatko Behzad Sharif C. Noel Bairey Merz Carl J. Pepine Chrisandra Shufelt Daniel S. Berman Eileen Handberg Galen Cook-Wiens George Sopko Janet Wei John W. Petersen Louise E. Thomson Manish Motwani Sawan Jalnapurkar Sherwin Dela Cruz Xiao Zhang

Corresponding Author

C. Noel Bairey Merz
Barbra Streisand Women’s Heart Center, Cedars-Sinai Smidt Heart Institute, Los Angeles, CA

A B S T R A C T

Background: Stress cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging with myocardial perfusion reserve index (MPRI) measurement has emerged as a noninvasive method for assessing coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMD) in the absence of obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD). Pharmacologic stress with adenosine or regadenoson is typically used with comparable coronary vasodilation, but higher unadjusted MPRI has been reported with regadenoson in healthy men. This difference has not been assessed in symptomatic or healthy women. Methods: In a prospective cohort study, 139 symptomatic women with suspected CMD and no obstructive CAD underwent stress CMR and invasive coronary flow reserve (CFR) testing. Adenosine was the default vasodilator (n=99), while regadenoson was used if history of asthma or prior adenosine intolerance (n=40). Stress CMR was also performed in 40 age-matched healthy controls using adenosine (n=20) and regadenoson (n=20). Unpaired t-tests and analysis of covariance were performed to compare MPRI with adenosine and regadenoson in the symptomatic women and healthy controls. Results: Compared to regadenoson cases, adenosine cases had lower invasive CFR (2.64±0.62 vs 2.94±0.68, p=0.01) and pharmacologic heart rate change (28±16 vs 38±15 bpm, p=0.0008). Unadjusted MPRI was lower in the adenosine compared to regadenoson cases (1.73±0.38 vs 2.27±0.59, p<0.0001). When adjusted for heart rate, rate-pressure-product, and invasive CFR, MPRI remained lower in the adenosine cases (p<0.0001). Invasive CFR to adenosine correlated with adenosine MPRI (r 0.17, p=0.02) but not regadenoson MPRI (r -0.14, p=0.19). There was no significant difference in MPRI in the controls who received adenosine vs regadenoson (2.27±0.33 vs 2.38±0.44, p=0.36). Conclusion: In women undergoing stress CMR for suspected CMD, those who received adenosine had lower MPRI than those who received regadenoson. However, there were no differences in MPRI in the healthy controls. These findings suggest there may be physiologic differences in adenosine and regadenoson response in the coronary microcirculation of symptomatic women.

Article Info

Article Type

Research Article

Publication history

Received: Mon 25, Nov 2019
Accepted: Fri 13, Dec 2019
Published: Tue 31, Dec 2019

Copyright

© 2023 C. Noel Bairey Merz . This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Hosting by Science Repository.
DOI: 10.31487/j.CDM.2019.01.01