Herz

, Volume 24, Issue 2, pp 126–131 | Cite as

Chest pain after coronary interventional procedures

Incidence and pathophysiology
  • Allen Jeremias
  • Sven Kutscher
  • Michael Haude
  • Dagmar Heinen
  • Dietrich Baumgart
  • Jörg Herrmann
  • Raimund Erbel
Article

Abstract

Chest pain following successful percutaneous coronary interventions is a common problem. Although the development of chest pain after coronary interventions may be of benign character, it is disturbing to patients, relatives and hospital staff. Such pain may be indicative of acute coronary artery closure, coronary artery spasm or myocardial infarction, but may also simply reflect local coronary artery trauma. The distinction between these causes of chest pain is crucial in selecting optimal care. Management of these patients may involve repeat coronary angiography and additional intervention. Commonly, repeat coronary angiography following percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) in patients with chest pain demonstrates widely patent lesion sites suggesting that the pain was due to coronary artery spasm, coronary arterial wall stretching or was of non-cardiac origin. As reported by the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute PTCA Registry, 4.6% of patients after angioplasty have coronary occlusions, 4.8% suffer a myocardial infarction, and 4.2% have coronary spasm. The frequency of chest pain after new device coronary interventions (atherectomy and stenting) seems to be even higher. However, only the minority of patients with post-procedural chest pain have indeed an ischemic event. Therefore, the vast majority of patients have recurrent chest pain without any signs of ischemia. There is some evidence that non-ischemic chest pain after coronary interventions is more common after stent implantation as compared to PTCA (41% vs. 12%). This may be due to the continuous stretching of the arterial wall by the stent as the elastic recoil occurring after PTCA is minimized. In conclusion, chest pain after coronary interventional procedures may potentially be hazardous when due to myocardial ischemia. However, especially after coronary stent placement, cardiologists must consider “stretch pain” due to the overdilation and stretching of the artery caused by the stent in the differential diagnosis. Clinically, it is, therefore, important to recognize that in addition to ischemia-related chest pain other types of chest pain do exist with cardiac origin.

Key Words

Chest pain Coronary interventions PTCA Stent implantation 

Herzschmerzen nach koronaren Interventionen. Inzidenz und Pathopysiologie

Zusammenfassung

Angina pectoris nach erfolgreicher koronarer Intervention ist ein häufig vorkommendes Problem. Auch wenn die Entwicklung von Angina pectoris nach einem interventionellen Eingriff von benignem Charakter sein kann, ist sie beängstigend für die Patienten, die Angehörigen und das medizinische Personal. Brustschmerz kann ein Anzeichen sein für einen akuten Verschluß des Gefäßes, einen Spasmus der Koronararterie oder einen Myokardinfarkt; er kann aber auch durch ein lokales Trauma bedingt sein. Die Unterscheidung dieser Ursachen ist von großer Bedeutung für die Wahl der optimalen Therapie. Diese beinhaltet wiederholte koronare Angiographie und, wenn nötig, eine erneute Intervention. Häufig sieht man jedoch bei wiederholter Angiographie nach PTCA ein weit offenes Gefäß. In diesen Fällen ist die Ursache der Schmerzsymptomatik am ehesten auf einen bereits gelösten Koronararterienspasmus. Schmerzrezeptoren in der Gefäßwand oder nichtkardiale Genese zurückzuführen. Ein Bericht der „National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute PTCA Registry” zeigte, daß 4,6% der Patienten nach Angioplastie einen koronaren Verschluß haben 4,8% erleiden einen Myokardinfarkt, und 4,2% haben einen Koronarspasmus. Die Inzidenz von Brustschmerz nach koronarer Atherektomie und Stent-Implantation erscheint sogar noch höher. Eine Minderheit der Patienten mit post-interventionellem Brustschmerz erleidet jedoch nur ein ischämisches Ereignis. Die Mehrheit der Patienten leidet demnach an Brustschmerzen ohne ein schämisches Korrelat. Es gibt Hinweise darauf, daß der nichtischämische Brustschmerz nach koronarer Intervention häufiger nach Stent-Implantation auftritt als nach PTCA (41% vs. 12%). Das liegt möglicherweise an der Überdehnung des Gefäßes durch den Stent, da die elastischen Rückstellkräfte im Gegensatz zur PTCA blockiert werden.

Zusammenfassend läßt sich sagen, daß ein Brustschmerz nach koronarer Intervention ischämisch bedingt sein kann. Besonders nach koronarer Stent-Implantation muß jedoch auch der „Dehnungsschmerz” bedingt durch eine Überdehnung des Gefäßes durch den Stent, in der Differentialdiagnose berücksichtigt werden.

Schlüsselwörter

Angina pectoris Koronare Intervention PTCA Stent-Implantation Brustschmerz Herzschmerz 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Abdelmeguid AE, Topol EJ. The myth of the myocardial infarctlet’ during percutaneous coronary revascularization procedures. Circulation 1996;94:3369–75.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Aueron F, Gruentzig A, Meier B. Significance of chest pain during percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. Am Heart J 1984;107:578–80.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brandenburg ROJ, Mooney JF, Gobel FL, et al. Evaluation of chest pain after coronary angioplasty: when is repeat angiography necessary? J Inv Cardiol 1990;2:233–8.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Brown AM. Excitation of afferent cardiac sympathetic nerve fibres during myocardial ischaemia. J Physiol (Lond) 1967;190: 35–53.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bush HS, Ferguson JJD, Angelini P, Willerson JT. Twelve-lead electrocardiographic evaluation of ischemia during percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty and its correlation with acute reocclusion. Am Heart J 1991;121:1591–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cowley MJ, Dorros G, Kelsey SF, et al. Acute coronary events associated with percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. Am J Cardiol 1984;53:12C-6C.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dorros G, Cowley MJ, Simpson J, et al. Percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty: report of complications from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute PTCA Registry. Circulation 1983;67:723–30.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fischell TA, Derby G, Tse TM, et al. Coronary artery vasoconstriction routinely occurs after percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. A quantitative arteriographic analysis. Circulation 1988;78:1323–34.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fischman DL, Leon MB, Baim DS, et al. A randomized comparison of coronary-stent placement and balloon angioplasty in the treatment of coronary artery disease. Stent Restenosis Study Investigators. N Engl J Med 1994;331:496–501.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fischman DL, Savage MP, Leon MB, et al. Effect of intracoronary stenting on intimal dissection after balloon angioplasty: results of quatitative and qualitative coronary analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol 1991;18:1445–51.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Galan KM, Gruentzig AR, Hollman J. Significance of early chest pain after coronary angioplasty. Heart Lung 1985;14:109–12.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Goldman L, Cook EF, Johnson PA, et al. Prediction of the need for intensive care in patients who come to the emergency departments with acute chest pain. N Engl J Med 1996;334:1498–504.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gregorini L, Fajadet J, Robert G, et al. Coronary vasoconstriction after percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty is attenuated by antiadrenergic agents. Circulation 1994;90:895–907.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gulbenkian S, Saetrum Opgaard O, Ekman R, et al. Peptidergic innervation of human epicardial coronary arteries. Circ Res 1993;73:579–88.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hamm CW, Goldmann BU, Heeschen C, et al. Emergency room triage of patients with acute chest pain by means of rapid testing for cardiac troponin T or troponin I. N Engl J Med 1997; 337:1648–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hainsworth R. Sensory functions of the heart. Ann Acad Med Singapore 1994;23:546–51.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Haude M, Erbel R, Straub U, et al. Results of intracoronary stents for management of coronary dissection after balloon angioplasty. Am J Cardiol 1991;67:691–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Haude M, Erbel R, Issa H, et al. Quantitative analysis of elastic recoil after balloon angioplasty and after intracoronary implantation of balloon-expandable Palmaz-Schatz stents. J Am Coll Cardiol 1993;21:26–34.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hollman J, Gruentzig AR, Douglas JS, Jr. et al. Acute occlusion after percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty—a new approach. Circulation 1983;68:725–32.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Jeremias A, Kutscher S, Haude M, et al. Nonischemic chest pain induced by coronary interventions—A prospective study comparing coronary angioplasty and stent implantation. Circulation 1998;98:2656–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Malliani A, Pagani M, Lombardi F. Visceral versus somatic mechanisms. In: Wall PD, Melzack R, eds. Textbook of pain. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone, 1989:128–40.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Malliani A. The elusive link between transient myocardial ischemia and pain. Circulation 1986;73:201–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Mansour M, Carrozza JP Jr., Kuntz RE, et al. Frequency and outcome of chest pain after two new coronary interventions (atherectomy and stenting). Am J Cardiol 1992;69:1379–82.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Martin SJ, Gorham LW. Cardiac pain. An experimental study with reference to the tension factor. Arch Intern Med 1938;62:840–52.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Saber RS, Edwards WD, Bailey KR, et al. Coronary embolization after balloon angioplasty or thrombolytic therapy: an autopsy study of 32 cases. J Am Coll Cardiol 1993;22:1283–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Safian RD, Gelbfish JS, Erny RE, et al. Coronary atherectomy. Clinical, angiographic, and histological findings and observations regarding potential mechanisms. Circulation 1990;82:69–79.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Schatz RA, Baim DS, Leon M, et al. Clinical experience with the Palmaz-Schatz coronary stent. Initial results of a multicenter study. Circulation 1991;83:148–61.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Serruys PW, de Jaegere P, Kiemeneij F, et al. A comparison of balloon-expandable-stent implantation with balloon angioplasty in patients with coronary artery disease. Benestent Study Group. N Engl J Med 1994;331:489–95.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sharf Y, Akselrod S, Navon G. Measurement of strain exerted on blood vessel walls by double-quantum-filtered 2H NMR. Magn Reson Med 1997;37:69–75.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Topol EJ, Leya F, Pinkerton CA, et al. A comparison of directional atherectomy with coronary angioplasty in patients with coronary artery disease. The CAVEAT Study Group. N Engl J Med 1993; 329:221–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Waksman R, Ghazzal ZM, Baim DS, et al. Myocardial infarction as a complication of new interventional devices. Am J Cardiol 1996;78:751–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    White JC. Cardiac pain. Anatomic pathways and physiologic mechanisms. Circulation 1957;16:644.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Wooley CF, Sparks EH, Boudoulas H. Aortic pain. Prog Cardiovasc Dis 1998;40:563–89.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Urban & Vogel 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • Allen Jeremias
    • 1
  • Sven Kutscher
    • 1
  • Michael Haude
    • 1
  • Dagmar Heinen
    • 1
  • Dietrich Baumgart
    • 1
  • Jörg Herrmann
    • 1
  • Raimund Erbel
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of CardiologyUniversity Hospital EssenGermany

Personalised recommendations