Autoimmune rheumatic diseases (ARDs) form a heterogeneous group of disorders that include systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), systemic sclerosis (SSc), rheumatoid arthritis (RA), idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIMs), and systemic vasculitis. Coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMD) is quite common in patients with ARDs and is linked to increased cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Inflammation plays a crucial role in the pathogenesis of both accelerated atherosclerosis and CMD in ARDs, especially in patients affected by SLE and RA. In this regard, some studies have highlighted the efficacy of immunosuppressants and/or biologics in restoring CMD in these patients. By contrast, the role of inflammation in the pathogenesis of CMD-SSc appears to be much less relevant compared to endothelial dysfunction and microvascular ischemia, with calcium-channel blockers providing some benefits. Few studies have endeavored to assess the occurrence of CMD in IIMs and systemic vasculitis, thus warranting further investigations. The present review summarizes the current evidence on the occurrence of CMD in ARDs, focusing on the role of inflammation and possible therapeutic approaches.

Prior studies have incompletely assessed whether the development of cardiometabolic risk factors (CVDRF) (hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and diabetes mellitus) mediates the association between anxiety and depression (anxiety/depression) and cardiovascular disease (CVD). The authors aimed to evaluate the following: 1) the association between anxiety/depression and incident CVDRFs and whether this association mediates the increased CVD risk; and 2) whether neuro-immune mechanisms and age and sex effects may be involved. Using a retrospective cohort design, Mass General Brigham Biobank subjects were followed for 10 years. Presence and timing of anxiety/depression, CVDRFs, and CVD were determined using ICD codes. Stress-related neural activity, chronic inflammation, and autonomic function were measured by the assessment of amygdalar-to-cortical activity ratio, high-sensitivity CRP, and heart rate variability. Multivariable regression and mediation analyses were employed. Among 71,214 subjects (median age 49.6 years; 55.3% female), 27,048 (38.0%) developed CVDRFs during follow-up. Pre-existing anxiety/depression associated with increased risk of incident CVDRF (OR: 1.71 [95% CI: 1.59-1.83], P < 0.001) and with a shorter time to their development (β = -0.486 [95% CI: -0.62 to -0.35], P < 0.001). The development of CVDRFs mediated the association between anxiety/depression and CVD events (log-odds: 0.044 [95% CI: 0.034-0.055], P < 0.05). Neuro-immune pathways contributed to the development of CVDRFs (P < 0.05 each) and significant age and sex effects were noted: younger women experienced the greatest acceleration in the development of CVDRFs after anxiety/depression. Anxiety/depression accelerate the development of CVDRFs. This association appears to be most notable among younger women and may be mediated by stress-related neuro-immune pathways. Evaluations of tailored preventive measures for individuals with anxiety/depression are needed to reduce CVD risk.

Background— We assessed coronary flow velocity pattern and coronary flow reserve (CFR) by contrast-enhanced transthoracic echocardiography (CE-TTE) as markers of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) related to cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV) after heart transplantation (HT). Methods and Results— Deceleration time of diastolic flow velocity (DDT) and CFR were measured in the left anterior descending coronary artery (LAD) by CE-TTE in 66 consecutive HT patients (follow-up 19±5 months). CFR was calculated as the ratio of hyperemic to basal diastolic flow velocity. Angiographies were analyzed by a qualitative grading system; CAV was defined as changes grade II or higher. MACE were cardiac death, stent implantation, and heart failure. Patients with MACE had higher CAV incidence ( P =0.004) and grade ( P =0.008), shorter DDT ( P =0.006), and lower CFR ( P =0.008). A receiver-operating characteristic–derived DDT cutpoint ≤840 ms (area under the curve 0.793; P =0.01) was 75% specific and 86% sensitive for predicting MACE, with positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of 33% and 97%, respectively ( P =0.002). A CFR cutpoint of ≤2.6 (area under the curve 0.746; P =0.01) was 62% specific and 91% sensitive for predicting MACE (PPV =32%, NPV =97%) ( P =0.001). Patients with CFR ≤2.6 and patients with DDT ≤840 ms had a lower survival free from MACE ( P =0.006 and P =0.009, respectively). By Cox regression, only a lower CFR predicted the risk of MACE (relative risk 3.1; 95% CI, 1.26 to 7.9; P =0.01). Conclusions— In HT patients, shorter DDT and lower CFR by CE-TTE are reliable markers for CAV-related MACE. CFR is the main independent predictor of MACE.

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is one of the greatest unmet needs in modern medicine. The lack of an appropriate therapy may reflect the lack of an accurate comprehension of its pathophysiology. Coronary microvascular rarefaction in HFpEF was first hypothesized in an autopsy study that showed how HFpEF patients had lower microvascular density and more myocardial fibrosis than control subjects. This was later confirmed in vivo when it was noted that HFpEF is associated with reduced myocardial flow reserve (MFR) at single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) and that coronary microvascular dysfunction may play a role in HFpEF disease processes. HFpEF patients were found to have lower coronary flow reserve (CFR) and a higher index of microvascular resistance (IMR). What is the cause of microvascular dysfunction? In 2013, a new paradigm for the pathogenesis of HFpEF has been proposed. It has been postulated that the presence of a proinflammatory state leads to coronary microvascular endothelial inflammation and reduced nitric oxide bioavailability, which ultimately results in heart failure. Recently, it has also been noted that inflammation is the main driver of HFpEF, but via an increase in inducible nitric oxide synthase (iNOS) resulting in a decrease in unfolded protein response. This review summarizes the current evidence on the etiology of coronary microvascular dysfunction in HFpEF, focusing on the role of inflammation and its possible prevention and therapy.

Angiotensin II receptor type 1 (AT1R) and endothelin-1 receptor type A (ETAR) are G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) expressed on the surface of a great variety of cells: immune cells, vascular smooth cells, endothelial cells, and fibroblasts express ETAR and AT1R, which are activated by endothelin 1 (ET1) and angiotensin II (AngII), respectively. Certain autoantibodies are specific for these receptors and can regulate their function, thus being known as functional autoantibodies. The function of these antibodies is similar to that of natural ligands, and it involves not only vasoconstriction, but also the secretion of proinflammatory cytokines (such as interleukin-6 (IL6), IL8 and TNF-α), collagen production by fibroblasts, and reactive oxygen species (ROS) release by fibroblasts and neutrophils. The role of autoantibodies against AT1R and ETAR (AT1R-AAs and ETAR-AAs, respectively) is well described in the pathogenesis of many medical conditions (e.g., systemic sclerosis (SSc) and SSc-associated pulmonary hypertension, cystic fibrosis, and allograft dysfunction), but their implications in cardiovascular diseases are still unclear. This review summarizes the current evidence regarding the effects of AT1R-AAs and ETAR-AAs in cardiovascular pathologies, highlighting their roles in heart transplantation and mechanical circulatory support, preeclampsia, and acute coronary syndromes.