Impaired coronary flow reserve in patients with supra-normal left ventricular ejection fraction at rest

Abstract Purpose Recently, a “U” hazard ratio curve between resting left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and prognosis has been observed in patients referred for routine clinical echocardiograms. The present study sought to explore whether a similar “U” curve existed between resting LVEF and coronary flow reserve (CFR) in patients without severe cardiovascular disease (CVD) and whether impaired CFR played a role in the adverse outcome of patients with supra-normal LVEF (snLVEF, LVEF ≥ 65%). Methods Two hundred ten consecutive patients (mean age 52.3 ± 9.3 years, 104 women) without severe CVD underwent clinically indicated rest/dipyridamole stress electrocardiography (ECG)-gated 13 N-ammonia positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT). Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) were followed up for 27.3 ± 9.5 months, including heart failure, late revascularization, re-hospitalization, and re-coronary angiography for any cardiac reason. Clinical characteristics, corrected CFR (cCFR), and MACE were compared among the three groups categorized by resting LVEF detected by PET/CT. Dose–response analyses using restricted cubic spline (RCS) functions, multivariate logistic regression, and Kaplan–Meier survival analysis were conducted to evaluate the relationship between resting LVEF and CFR/outcome. Results An inverted “U” curve existed between resting LVEF and cCFR ( p = 0.06). Both patients with snLVEF ( n = 38) and with reduced LVEF (rLVEF, LVEF < 55%) ( n = 66) displayed a higher incidence of reduced cCFR than those with normal LVEF (nLVEF, 55% ≤ LVEF < 65%) ( n = 106) (57.9% vs 54.5% vs 34.3%, p < 0.01, respectively). Both snLVEF ( p < 0.01) and rLVEF ( p < 0.05) remained independent predictors for reduced cCFR after multivariable adjustment. Patients with snLVEF encountered more MACE than those with nLVEF (10.5% vs 0.9%, log-rank p = 0.01). Conclusions Patients with snLVEF are prone to impaired cCFR, which may be related to the adverse prognosis. Further investigations are warranted to explore its underlying pathological mechanism and clinical significance.