Aim Angina pectoris in the absence of obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) is common and is associated with poor quality of life (QOL). Coronary microvascular endothelial dysfunction is associated with myocardial ischaemia and is a common cause of angina. We hypothesise that evaluation of coronary endothelial function, its diagnosis and treatment will favourably impact QOL in patients with angina symptoms and non-obstructive CAD.
Methods and results Follow-up was done on 457 patients with chest pain and non-obstructive coronary arteries who had undergone coronary vascular reactivity evaluation by administration of intracoronary acetylcholine at the time of diagnostic study. After a mean follow-up of 8.4±4.7 years, QOL was assessed by administration of the SF-36 QOL survey. Patients diagnosed and treated for microvascular endothelial dysfunction had a higher (better) overall mental composite score (44.8 vs 40.9, p=0.036) and mental health score (44.2 vs 40.7, p=0.047), and a trend towards higher vitality scores (39.1 vs 35.9, p=0.053) and role emotional scores (43.6 vs 40.4, p=0.073), compared with patients with normal endothelial function.
Conclusion Among patients with chest pain and normal coronaries, diagnosis and treatment of coronary microvascular endothelial dysfunction in those with angina pectoris and non-obstructive CAD are associated with better QOL compared with patients with normal endothelial function.
- microvascular endothelial function
- quality of life
This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Contributors The authors of the paper take full responsibility.
Funding The study was supported by grants from the NIH (NIH K24 HL-69840, NIH R01 HL-63911, HL-77131, HL 92954, HL 085307, DK 73608) and the Mayo Foundation.
Competing interests None declared.
Patient consent for publication Obtained.
Ethics approval The Mayo Clinic Institutional Review Board approved the study.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Data sharing statement No additional data are available.
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.