Herz · 2015
Left ventricular end diastolic pressure for detection of intracoronary ergonovine-induced myocardial ischemia.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Jang H-J, Kim T-H, Kwon S W, Kim J-Y, Kim J S, Lee H J, Park J S, Choi R K, Choi Y J, Shim W-H
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Recent consensus on variant angina defines significant spasm as total or subtotal occlusion of a coronary artery. However, the clinical significance of "less-than-subtotal" spasm needs to be reappraised, especially if the coronary spasm is combined with chest pain. Therefore, we evaluated the feasibility of left ventricular end diastolic pressure (LVEDP) as a tool to detect myocardial ischemia during ergonovine provocation testing.
METHODS: After achieving two access sites, 29 patients underwent successful LVEDP monitoring using 5-Fr pigtail catheters during ergonovine provocation tests. Patients were divided into two groups based on the occurrence of anginal symptoms.
RESULTS: Of the 29 patients, 16 (55 %) patients had anginal symptoms. LVEDP was significantly increased in the symptomatic group compared with the nonsymptomatic group (∆LVEDP 5.6 ± 4.2 vs. 1.2 ± 2.0 mmHg, p = 0.002). However, of the 16 patients with anginal symptoms, positive provocation test results were confirmed in only six patients (38 %) as per the traditional standard (> 90 % inducible spasm of the epicardial coronary artery).
CONCLUSION: Compared with the traditional standard, LVEDP may have advantages in terms of elucidating anginal symptoms in patients suspected of having coronary vasospasm when performing ergonovine provocation tests.
METHODS: After achieving two access sites, 29 patients underwent successful LVEDP monitoring using 5-Fr pigtail catheters during ergonovine provocation tests. Patients were divided into two groups based on the occurrence of anginal symptoms.
RESULTS: Of the 29 patients, 16 (55 %) patients had anginal symptoms. LVEDP was significantly increased in the symptomatic group compared with the nonsymptomatic group (∆LVEDP 5.6 ± 4.2 vs. 1.2 ± 2.0 mmHg, p = 0.002). However, of the 16 patients with anginal symptoms, positive provocation test results were confirmed in only six patients (38 %) as per the traditional standard (> 90 % inducible spasm of the epicardial coronary artery).
CONCLUSION: Compared with the traditional standard, LVEDP may have advantages in terms of elucidating anginal symptoms in patients suspected of having coronary vasospasm when performing ergonovine provocation tests.