Tandem lesions associate with angiographic progression of coronary artery stenoses

Kyle B Franke; Nicholas J Montarello; Adam J Nelson; Jessica A Marathe; Dennis T L Wong; Rosanna Tavella; Margaret Arstall; Christopher Zeitz; Matthew I Worthley; John F Beltrame; Peter J Psaltis

doi:10.1016/j.ijcha.2024.101417

Tandem lesions associate with angiographic progression of coronary artery stenoses

Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc. 2024 May 3:52:101417. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcha.2024.101417. eCollection 2024 Jun.

Authors

Kyle B Franke¹, Nicholas J Montarello^{2

3}, Adam J Nelson^{1

2

3}, Jessica A Marathe^{2

3}, Dennis T L Wong⁴, Rosanna Tavella^{1

3}, Margaret Arstall^{1

5}, Christopher Zeitz^{1

3}, Matthew I Worthley^{1

2

3}, John F Beltrame^{1

3}, Peter J Psaltis^{1

2

3}

Affiliations

¹ Adelaide Medical School, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia.
² Lifelong Health Theme, South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute, Adelaide, Australia.
³ Department of Cardiology, Central Adelaide Local Health Network, Adelaide, Australia.
⁴ Victorian Heart Hospital, Clayton, Victoria, Australia.
⁵ Department of Cardiology, Northern Adelaide Local Health Network, Adelaide, Australia.

Abstract

Background: Although the clinical factors associated with progression of coronary artery disease have been well studied, the angiographic predictors are less defined.

Objectives: Our objective was to study the clinical and angiographic factors that associate with progression of coronary artery stenoses.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of consecutive patients undergoing multiple, clinically indicated invasive coronary angiograms with an interval greater than 6 months, between January 2013 and December 2016. Lesion segments were analysed using Quantitative Coronary Angiography (QCA) if a stenosis ≥ 20 % was identified on either angiogram. Stenosis progression was defined as an increase ≥ 10 % in stenosis severity, with progressor groups analysed on both patient and lesion levels. Mixed-effects regression analyses were performed to evaluate factors associated with progression of individual stenoses.

Results: 199 patients were included with 881 lesions analysed. 108 (54.3 %) patients and 186 (21.1 %) stenoses were classified as progressors. The median age was 65 years (IQR 56-73) and the median interval between angiograms was 2.1 years (IQR 1.2-3.0). On a patient level, age, number of lesions and presence of multivessel disease at baseline were each associated with progressor status. On a lesion level, presence of a stenosis downstream (OR 3.07, 95 % CI 2.04-4.63, p < 0.001) and circumflex artery stenosis location (OR 1.81, 95 % CI 1.21-2.7, p = 0.004) were associated with progressor status. Other lesion characteristics did not significantly impact progressor status or change in stenosis severity.

Conclusion: Coronary lesions which have a downstream stenosis may be at increased risk of stenosis progression. Further research into the mechanistic basis of this finding is required, along with its implications for plaque vulnerability and clinical outcomes.

Keywords: Atherosclerosis; Coronary artery disease; Plaque progression; Quantitative coronary angiography.