Effects of type 2 diabetes mellitus on coronary microvascular function and myocardial perfusion in patients without obstructive coronary artery disease
We assessed the impact of type 2 diabetes, in the presence of other major cardiovascular risk factors, on coronary microvascular function and myocardial perfusion in patients without obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD).
In this prospective study, 23 patients with type 2 diabetes and 26 nondiabetic patients matched for age, sex and other cardiovascular risk factors underwent a cold pressure test (CPT) and dipyridamole transthoracic echocardiography to determine their coronary flow (CF) ratio. Within 2 weeks, all diabetic patients also underwent dipyridamole-rest myocardial perfusion single-photon emission (MPS) CT. None of the patients with or without diabetes had significant CAD on invasive coronary angiography.
The CPT-CF ratio was significantly lower in diabetic patients than in nondiabetic patients (1.46 ± 0.26 vs. 1.71 ± 0.32, p = 0.006) and was correlated significantly with fasting glycaemia (r = −0.35, p = 0.01), but not with glycated haemoglobin. The dipyridamole-CF ratio was also lower in diabetic patients than in nondiabetic patients (2.38 ± 0.74 vs. 2.75 ± 0.49, p = 0.04). On MPS imaging, 5 diabetic patients (22%) had stress-induced ischaemia and the remaining 18 (78%) had normal myocardial perfusion. The dipyridamole-CF ratio was not different in patients with and without reversible defects (2.3 ± 1.1 vs. 2.4 ± 0.6, p = 0.97).
Coronary microvascular function is impaired in type 2 diabetic patients without significant CAD, compared to nondiabetic patients with similar other cardiovascular risk factors. In the majority of diabetic patients, microvascular dysfunction is associated with normal myocardial perfusion.
KeywordsType 2 diabetes mellitus Microvascular dysfunction Myocardial perfusion imaging
- 1.Schramm TK, Gislason GH, Køber L, Rausmussen S, Rausmussen JN, Abildstrøm SZ, et al. Diabetes patients requiring glucose-lowering therapy and nondiabetics with a prior myocardial infarction carry the same cardiovascular risk: a population study of 3.3 million people. Circulation. 2008;117:1945–54.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 5.Galderisi M, Capaldo B, Sidiropulos M, D’Errico A, Ferrara L, Turco A, et al. Determinants of reduction of coronary flow reserve in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus or arterial hypertension without angiographically determined epicardial coronary stenosis. Am J Hypertens. 2007;20:1283–90.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 19.Nitenberg A, Pham I, Antony I, Valensi P. Cardiovascular outcome of patients with abnormal coronary vasomotion and normal coronary arteriography is worse in type 2 diabetes mellitus than in arterial hypertension: A 10 year follow-up study. Atherosclerosis. 2005;183:113–20.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 20.Schindler TH, Nitzasche EU, Schelbert HR, Olschewski M, Saayre J, Mix M, et al. Positron emission tomography-measured abnormal responses of myocardial blood flow to sympathetic stimulation are associated with the risk of developing cardiovascular events. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005;45:1505–12.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 33.Jeserich M, Schindler TH, Olschewski M, Unmussing M, Just H, Solzbach U. Vitamin C improves endothelial function of epicardial coronary arteries in patients with hypercholesterolemia or essential hypertension – assessed by cold pressure testing. Eur Heart J. 1999;20:1676–80.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 36.Sudhir K, MacGregor JS, Barbant SD, Foster E, Fitzgerald PJ, Chatterjee K, et al. Assessment of coronary conductance and resistance vessel reactivity in response to nitroglycerin, ergonovine and adenosine: in vivo studies with simultaneous intravascular two-dimensional and Doppler ultrasound. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1993;21:1261–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 37.Perrone-Filardi P, Achenbach S, Möhlenkamp S, Reiner Z, Sambuceti G, Schuijf JD, et al. Cardiac computed tomography and myocardial perfusion scintigraphy for risk stratification in asymptomatic individuals without known cardiovascular disease: a position statement of the Working Group on Nuclear Cardiology and Cardiac CT of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J. 2011;32:1986–93.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar