International journal of cardiology · 2016
Noninvasive assessment of myocardial bridging by coronary flow velocity reserve with transthoracic Doppler echocardiography: vasodilator vs. inotropic stimulation.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание 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.
Aleksandric Srdjan, Djordjevic-Dikic Ana, Beleslin Branko, Parapid Biljana, Teofilovski-Parapid Gordana, Stepanovic Jelena, Simic Dragan, Nedeljkovic Ivana, Petrovic Milan, Dobric Milan, Tomasevic Miloje, Banovic Marko, Nedeljkovic Milan, Ostojic Miodrag
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: To consider hemodynamic assessment of myocardial bridging (MB) adequate, it is believed that inotropic stimulation with dobutamine should be estimated because its dynamic nature depends on the degree of extravascular coronary compression. This study evaluated comparative assessment of hemodynamic relevance of MB using coronary flow velocity reserve (CFVR) measurements by transthoracic Doppler echocardiography (TTDE) with vasodilatative and inotropic challenges.
METHODS: This prospective study included forty-four patients with angiographic evidence of isolated MB of the left anterior descending coronary artery (LAD) and systolic compression of ≥50% diameter stenosis. All patients were evaluated by exercise stress-echocardiography (ExSE) test for signs of myocardial ischemia, and CFVR of the distal segment of LAD during iv.infusion of adenosine (ADO:140μg/kg/min) and iv.infusion of dobutamine (DOB:10-40μg/kg/min), separately.
RESULTS: Exercise-SE was positive for myocardial ischemia in 8/44 (18%) of patients. CFVR during ADO was significantly higher than CFVR during peak DOB (2.85±0.68 vs. 2.44±0.48, p=0.002). CFVR during peak DOB was significantly lower in SE-positive group in comparison to SE-negative group (2.01±0.16 vs. 2.54±0.47, p<0.001), but not for ADO (2.47±0.51 vs. 2.89±0.70, p=0.168), respectively. Multivariable logistic analysis showed that CFVR peak DOB was the most significant predictor of functional significant MB (OR 0.011, 95%CI: 0.001-0.507, p=0.021). Receiver-operating characteristic curves have shown that TTDE-CFVR obtained by high-dose of dobutamine infusion is better than those by adenosine regarding to functional status of MB (AUC 0.861, p=0.004; AUC 0.674, p=0.179, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: Non-invasive CFVR measurement by TTDE during inotropic stimulation, in comparison to vasodilation, provides more reliable functional evaluation of MB.
METHODS: This prospective study included forty-four patients with angiographic evidence of isolated MB of the left anterior descending coronary artery (LAD) and systolic compression of ≥50% diameter stenosis. All patients were evaluated by exercise stress-echocardiography (ExSE) test for signs of myocardial ischemia, and CFVR of the distal segment of LAD during iv.infusion of adenosine (ADO:140μg/kg/min) and iv.infusion of dobutamine (DOB:10-40μg/kg/min), separately.
RESULTS: Exercise-SE was positive for myocardial ischemia in 8/44 (18%) of patients. CFVR during ADO was significantly higher than CFVR during peak DOB (2.85±0.68 vs. 2.44±0.48, p=0.002). CFVR during peak DOB was significantly lower in SE-positive group in comparison to SE-negative group (2.01±0.16 vs. 2.54±0.47, p<0.001), but not for ADO (2.47±0.51 vs. 2.89±0.70, p=0.168), respectively. Multivariable logistic analysis showed that CFVR peak DOB was the most significant predictor of functional significant MB (OR 0.011, 95%CI: 0.001-0.507, p=0.021). Receiver-operating characteristic curves have shown that TTDE-CFVR obtained by high-dose of dobutamine infusion is better than those by adenosine regarding to functional status of MB (AUC 0.861, p=0.004; AUC 0.674, p=0.179, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: Non-invasive CFVR measurement by TTDE during inotropic stimulation, in comparison to vasodilation, provides more reliable functional evaluation of MB.