Ole Geir Solberg1, Knut Stavem2,3,4, Asgrimur Ragnarsson5, Jan-Otto Beitnes1, Rita Skårdal1, Ingebjørg Seljeflot2,6, Thor Ueland2,7,8, Pål Aukrust2,8,9, Lars Gullestad1,2,10, Lars Aaberge1. 1. Department of Cardiology, Oslo University Hospital, Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway. 2. Faculty of Medicine, Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway. 3. Department of Pulmonary Medicine, Akershus University Hospital, Lørenskog, Norway. 4. Department of Health Services Research, Akershus University Hospital, Lørenskog, Norway. 5. Department of Radiology, Oslo University Hospital, Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway. 6. Center for Clinical Heart Research, Department of Cardiology, Oslo University Hospital, Ullevål, Oslo, Norway. 7. K.G. Jebsen TREC, University of Tromsø, Tromsø, Norway. 8. Research Institute of Internal Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway. 9. Section of Clinical Immunology and Infectious Diseases, Oslo University Hospital, Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway. 10. K.G. Jebsen Cardiac Research Centre and Centre for Heart Failure Research, Faculty of Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION:Many women undergoingcoronary angiography for chest pain have no or only minimal coronary artery disease (CAD). However, despite the lack of obstructive CAD, they still have an increased risk of major adverse cardiovascular events. Pleiotropic effects of statins may influence microvascular function, but if statins improve microvascular function in unselected chest pain patients is not well studied. This study assessed microvascular function by using the thermodilution-derived test "the index of microvascular resistance" (IMR) with the aim of determining the (i) IMR level in women with chest pain and non-obstructive CAD and if (ii) IMR is modified by high-dose statin treatment in these patients. Additional objectives were to identify the influence of statins on the health status as assessed with generic health questionnaires and on biomarkers of endothelial activation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was a randomized, double-blind, single-center trial comparing 6 months of rosuvastatin treatment with placebo. In total, 66 women without obstructive CAD were included. Mean age was 52.7 years and 55.5 years in theplacebo and rosuvastatin group, respectively. Microvascular function was assessed using the IMR, health status was assessed using the SF-36 and EQ-5D questionnaires, and biochemical values were assessed at baseline and 6 months later. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: In the placebo group IMR was 14.6 (SD 5.7) at baseline and 14.4 (SD 6.5) at follow-up. In the rosuvastatin group IMR was 16.5 (SD 7.5) at baseline and 14.2 (SD 5.8) at follow-up. IMR did not differ significantly between the two study groups at follow-up controlled for preintervention values. C-reactive protein (CRP) was comparable between the groups at baseline, while at follow-up CRP was significantly lower in the rosuvastatin group compared to placebo [0.6 (±0.5) mg/L vs. 2.6 (±3.0) mg/L; p = 0.002]. Whereas rosuvastatin treatment for 6 months attenuated CRP levels, it did not improve microvascular function as assessed by IMR (Clinical Trials.gov NCT01582165, EUDRACT 2011-002630-39.3tcAZ).
RCT Entities:
INTRODUCTION: Many women undergoing coronary angiography for chest pain have no or only minimal coronary artery disease (CAD). However, despite the lack of obstructive CAD, they still have an increased risk of major adverse cardiovascular events. Pleiotropic effects of statins may influence microvascular function, but if statins improve microvascular function in unselected chest painpatients is not well studied. This study assessed microvascular function by using the thermodilution-derived test "the index of microvascular resistance" (IMR) with the aim of determining the (i) IMR level in women with chest pain and non-obstructive CAD and if (ii) IMR is modified by high-dose statin treatment in these patients. Additional objectives were to identify the influence of statins on the health status as assessed with generic health questionnaires and on biomarkers of endothelial activation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was a randomized, double-blind, single-center trial comparing 6 months of rosuvastatin treatment with placebo. In total, 66 women without obstructive CAD were included. Mean age was 52.7 years and 55.5 years in the placebo and rosuvastatin group, respectively. Microvascular function was assessed using the IMR, health status was assessed using the SF-36 and EQ-5D questionnaires, and biochemical values were assessed at baseline and 6 months later. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: In the placebo group IMR was 14.6 (SD 5.7) at baseline and 14.4 (SD 6.5) at follow-up. In the rosuvastatin group IMR was 16.5 (SD 7.5) at baseline and 14.2 (SD 5.8) at follow-up. IMR did not differ significantly between the two study groups at follow-up controlled for preintervention values. C-reactive protein (CRP) was comparable between the groups at baseline, while at follow-up CRP was significantly lower in the rosuvastatin group compared to placebo [0.6 (±0.5) mg/L vs. 2.6 (±3.0) mg/L; p = 0.002]. Whereas rosuvastatin treatment for 6 months attenuated CRP levels, it did not improve microvascular function as assessed by IMR (Clinical Trials.gov NCT01582165, EUDRACT 2011-002630-39.3tcAZ).
Authors: Niya Mileva; Sakura Nagumo; Takuya Mizukami; Jeroen Sonck; Colin Berry; Emanuele Gallinoro; Giovanni Monizzi; Alessandro Candreva; Daniel Munhoz; Dobrin Vassilev; Martin Penicka; Emanuele Barbato; Bernard De Bruyne; Carlos Collet Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2022-03-18 Impact factor: 6.106
Authors: Martin Kummen; Ole Geir Solberg; Christopher Storm-Larsen; Kristian Holm; Asgrimur Ragnarsson; Marius Trøseid; Beate Vestad; Rita Skårdal; Arne Yndestad; Thor Ueland; Asbjørn Svardal; Rolf K Berge; Ingebjørg Seljeflot; Lars Gullestad; Tom H Karlsen; Lars Aaberge; Pål Aukrust; Johannes R Hov Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2020-03-25 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Kira Bang Bove; Malin Nilsson; Lene Rørholm Pedersen; Nicolai Mikkelsen; Hannah Elena Suhrs; Arne Astrup; Eva Prescott Journal: PLoS One Date: 2020-11-05 Impact factor: 3.240