BACKGROUND: Microvascular dysfunction is emerging as a strong predictor of outcome in heart transplant recipients. At this time, the determinants and consequences of early microvascular dysfunction are not well established. The objective of the study was to determine the risk factors and functional correlates associated with early microvascular dysfunction in heart transplant recipients. METHODS AND RESULTS: Sixty-three heart transplant recipients who had coronary physiology assessment, right heart catheterization, and echocardiography performed at the time of their first annual evaluation were included in the study. Microvascular dysfunction was assessed using the recently described index of microcirculatory resistance. The presence of microvascular dysfunction, predefined by an index of microcirculatory resistance >20, was observed in 46% of patients at 1 year. A history of acute rejection and undersized donor hearts were associated with microvascular dysfunction at 1 year, with odds ratio of 4.0 (1.3-12.8) and 3.6 (1.2-11.1), respectively. Patients with microvascular dysfunction had lower cardiac index (3.1±0.7 versus 3.5±0.7 L/min per m(2); P=0.02) and mild graft dysfunction measured by echocardiography-derived left and right myocardial performance indices ([0.54±0.09 versus 0.43±0.09; P<0.01] and [0.47±0.14 versus 0.32±0.05; P<0.01], respectively). Microvascular dysfunction was also associated with a higher likelihood of death, graft failure, or allograft vasculopathy at 5 years after transplant (hazard ratio, 2.52 [95% CI, 1.04-5.91]). CONCLUSIONS: A history of acute rejection during the first year and smaller donor hearts were identified as risk factors for early microvascular dysfunction. Microvascular dysfunction assessed using index of microcirculatory resistances at 1 year was also associated with worse graft function and possibly worse clinical outcomes.
BACKGROUND:Microvascular dysfunction is emerging as a strong predictor of outcome in heart transplant recipients. At this time, the determinants and consequences of early microvascular dysfunction are not well established. The objective of the study was to determine the risk factors and functional correlates associated with early microvascular dysfunction in heart transplant recipients. METHODS AND RESULTS: Sixty-three heart transplant recipients who had coronary physiology assessment, right heart catheterization, and echocardiography performed at the time of their first annual evaluation were included in the study. Microvascular dysfunction was assessed using the recently described index of microcirculatory resistance. The presence of microvascular dysfunction, predefined by an index of microcirculatory resistance >20, was observed in 46% of patients at 1 year. A history of acute rejection and undersized donor hearts were associated with microvascular dysfunction at 1 year, with odds ratio of 4.0 (1.3-12.8) and 3.6 (1.2-11.1), respectively. Patients with microvascular dysfunction had lower cardiac index (3.1±0.7 versus 3.5±0.7 L/min per m(2); P=0.02) and mild graft dysfunction measured by echocardiography-derived left and right myocardial performance indices ([0.54±0.09 versus 0.43±0.09; P<0.01] and [0.47±0.14 versus 0.32±0.05; P<0.01], respectively). Microvascular dysfunction was also associated with a higher likelihood of death, graft failure, or allograft vasculopathy at 5 years after transplant (hazard ratio, 2.52 [95% CI, 1.04-5.91]). CONCLUSIONS: A history of acute rejection during the first year and smaller donor hearts were identified as risk factors for early microvascular dysfunction. Microvascular dysfunction assessed using index of microcirculatory resistances at 1 year was also associated with worse graft function and possibly worse clinical outcomes.
Authors: William F Fearon; Kozo Okada; Jon A Kobashigawa; Yuhei Kobayashi; Helen Luikart; Sean Sana; Tiffany Daun; Steven A Chmura; Seema Sinha; Garett Cohen; Yasuhiro Honda; Michael Pham; David B Lewis; Daniel Bernstein; Alan C Yeung; Hannah A Valantine; Kiran Khush Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2017-06-13 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Jung-Min Ahn; Frederik M Zimmermann; Satish Arora; Ole-Geir Solberg; Oskar Angerås; Katrine Rolid; Muzammil Rafique; Lars Aaberge; Kristjan Karason; Kozo Okada; Helen Luikart; Kiran K Khush; Yasuhiro Honda; Nico H J Pijls; Sang Eun Lee; Jae-Joong Kim; Seung-Jung Park; Lars Gullestad; William F Fearon Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2021-12-21 Impact factor: 35.855
Authors: Jeffrey M Dendy; Sean G Hughes; Jonathan H Soslow; Daniel E Clark; Cynthia B Paschal; John C Gore Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2022-04-13 Impact factor: 10.065
Authors: Anthony W Castleberry; Adam D DeVore; Kevin W Southerland; James M Meza; William D Irish; Joseph G Rogers; Carmelo A Milano; Chetan B Patel Journal: ASAIO J Date: 2016 May-Jun Impact factor: 2.872
Authors: Matthew C Konerman; John J Lazarus; Richard L Weinberg; Ravi V Shah; Michael Ghannam; Scott L Hummel; James R Corbett; Edward P Ficaro; Keith D Aaronson; Monica M Colvin; Todd M Koelling; Venkatesh L Murthy Journal: Circ Heart Fail Date: 2018-06 Impact factor: 8.790
Authors: Nishant R Shah; Ron Blankstein; Todd Villines; Hafiz Imran; Alan R Morrison; Michael K Cheezum Journal: Curr Cardiovasc Imaging Rep Date: 2018-09-24
Authors: Martina Bona; Rahel K Wyss; Maria Arnold; Natalia Méndez-Carmona; Maria N Sanz; Dominik Günsch; Lucio Barile; Thierry P Carrel; Sarah L Longnus Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2021-01-30 Impact factor: 5.501
Authors: Kim H Chan; Philippa J L Simpson; Andy S Yong; Louise L Dunn; Chirapan Chawantanpipat; Chijen Hsu; Young Yu; Anthony C Keech; David S Celermajer; Martin K C Ng Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-04-15 Impact factor: 3.240