Diagnostic Yield and Clinical Utility of Coronary Angiography Versus Coronary Function Testing in Women With Angina and Nonobstructive Coronary Arteries.

backgroundApproximately 50% of women referred for invasive coronary angiography have angina and nonobstructive coronary arteries, which includes coronary microvascular dysfunction, vasospastic angina, and other vasomotor disorders. We sought to determine the real-world diagnostic yield of invasive coronary angiography and coronary function testing in women with angina and nonobstructive coronary arteries. METHODS AND

resultsFrom 2018 to 2023, we enrolled 198 women who underwent either coronary angiography (CA) alone (n=99) or coronary function testing (CFT; n=99). Mean±SD age was 62±10 years (CA alone) compared with 57±10 years (CFT). Coronary angiography was interpreted as nonobstructive coronary artery disease more frequently after CA alone (79% versus 52%). Of the women who underwent CFT, 82% (N=81) were found to have vasomotor disorders, including coronary microvascular dysfunction (27%), vasospastic angina (32%), mixed coronary microvascular dysfunction/vasospastic angina (16%), endothelial dysfunction (10%; without spasm), elevated resting flow (2%), or symptomatic myocardial bridging (4%). Compared with women undergoing CA alone, medications were changed more frequently after CFT at 24 hours (41% versus 65%;

conclusionsOur findings demonstrate that women presenting with suspected ischemic heart disease undergoing CA alone only received an anatomic diagnosis, whereas >80% of women undergoing CFT received a specific diagnosis of a coronary vasomotor disorder and greater intensification of antianginal therapy.