Circulation · 1997
Knowledge of perfusion and contractile reserve improves the predictive value of recovery of regional myocardial function postrevascularization: a study using the combination of myocardial contrast echocardiography and dobutamine echocardiography.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Meza M F, Ramee S, Collins T, Stapleton D, Milani R V, Murgo J P, Cheirif J
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: This study was designed to determine the value of myocardial contrast echocardiography (MCE) and dobutamine echocardiography (DE), alone or in combination, in predicting functional recovery in patients with resting wall motion abnormalities due to CAD. MCE and DE have been independently shown to be useful in detecting myocardial viability in the post-myocardial infarction setting.
METHODS AND RESULTS: Thirty-nine patients with significant coronary artery disease and resting wall motion abnormalities underwent DE (2.5 to 20 microg x kg(-1) x min(-1)) and wall motion analysis (16-segment model). MCE was performed with selective intracoronary injections of sonicated meglumine (2 cm3). Myocardial viability was defined as presence of contrast effect by MCE and contractile reserve or an ischemic response by DE. Functional recovery (improvement in wall motion) was assessed after revascularization (percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty, n=20; coronary artery bypass surgery, n=19). When the two groups of patients were analyzed, MCE was associated with excellent sensitivities (84%) yet poor specificities (19% to 26%); DE had lower sensitivities (79% to 80%) but also poor specificities (30% to 36%). The combination of both was associated with excellent sensitivities (90% to 93%) and modest specificities (48% to 50%) for predicting functional recovery. A biphasic response with DE was infrequent (14% to 42%) but highly specific of functional recovery (84% to 94%). MCE had an excellent negative predictive value for functional recovery (83%).
CONCLUSIONS: The prediction of functional recovery post-revascularization can be enhanced by combining MCE and DE.
METHODS AND RESULTS: Thirty-nine patients with significant coronary artery disease and resting wall motion abnormalities underwent DE (2.5 to 20 microg x kg(-1) x min(-1)) and wall motion analysis (16-segment model). MCE was performed with selective intracoronary injections of sonicated meglumine (2 cm3). Myocardial viability was defined as presence of contrast effect by MCE and contractile reserve or an ischemic response by DE. Functional recovery (improvement in wall motion) was assessed after revascularization (percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty, n=20; coronary artery bypass surgery, n=19). When the two groups of patients were analyzed, MCE was associated with excellent sensitivities (84%) yet poor specificities (19% to 26%); DE had lower sensitivities (79% to 80%) but also poor specificities (30% to 36%). The combination of both was associated with excellent sensitivities (90% to 93%) and modest specificities (48% to 50%) for predicting functional recovery. A biphasic response with DE was infrequent (14% to 42%) but highly specific of functional recovery (84% to 94%). MCE had an excellent negative predictive value for functional recovery (83%).
CONCLUSIONS: The prediction of functional recovery post-revascularization can be enhanced by combining MCE and DE.