Literature DB >> 15342285

Comparison of real-time myocardial contrast echocardiography for the assessment of myocardial viability with fluorodeoxyglucose-18 positron emission tomography and dobutamine stress echocardiography.

Grigorios Korosoglou1, Alexander Hansen, Johannes Hoffend, Goran Gavrilovic, David Wolf, Joerg Zehelein, Uwe Haberkorn, Helmut Kuecherer.   

Abstract

Little is known about the diagnostic value of real-time myocardial contrast echocardiography (MCE) for the assessment of myocardial viability. We compared the diagnostic accuracy of MCE with that of low-dose dobutamine stress echocardiography (DSE) and of combined technetium-99 sestamibi single-photon emission computed tomography and fluorodeoxyglucose-18 positron emission tomography and investigated whether quantitative assessment of myocardial blood flow could increase its diagnostic value. Cardiac imaging was performed with these 3 methods in 41 patients who had ischemic heart disease (ejection fraction < 40%) and were being considered for revascularization. Follow-up echocardiograms were obtained after 3 to 6 months in revascularized patients, and increased regional function served as a standard reference for assessment of myocardial viability. A control group of 25 patients who had no coronary artery disease underwent MCE to assess normal values of myocardial perfusion parameters. Recovery of myocardial function was predicted by MCE with a sensitivity of 86% and a specificity of 43%. Nuclear imaging was comparably sensitive (90%) and specific (44%), whereas low-dose DSE was similarly sensitive (83%) but more specific (76%). Normalization of myocardial signal intensity to that of the control group significantly increased the specificity of MCE from 43% to 64% and the accuracy from 73% to 81%. A combination of quantitative MCE and DSE provided the best diagnostic characteristics, with a sensitivity of 96%, a specificity of 63%, and an accuracy of 83%. Thus, MCE is useful for assessing myocardial viability. Normalization of contrast intensity to that of a reference control group is a valid approach for detection of myocardial viability and expands on information obtained from visual MCE and DSE. Copyright 2004 Excerpta Medica, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15342285     DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2004.05.018

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Cardiol        ISSN: 0002-9149            Impact factor:   2.778


  9 in total

1.  Usefulness of myocardial parametric imaging to evaluate myocardial viability in experimental and in clinical studies.

Authors:  G Korosoglou; A Hansen; R Bekeredjian; A Filusch; S Hardt; D Wolf; D Schellberg; H A Katus; H Kuecherer
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2005-06-06       Impact factor: 5.994

Review 2.  Myocardial perfusion imaging with contrast echocardiography.

Authors:  Chad L Carr; Jonathan R Lindner
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 2.931

Review 3.  Quantitative assessment of myocardial blush grade in patients with coronary artery disease and in cardiac transplant recipients.

Authors:  Nina Patricia Hofmann; Hartmut Dickhaus; Hugo A Katus; Grigorios Korosoglou
Journal:  World J Cardiol       Date:  2014-10-26

4.  Positron emission tomography for the assessment of myocardial viability: an evidence-based analysis.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ont Health Technol Assess Ser       Date:  2005-10-01

5.  Strain-encoded cardiac MRI as an adjunct for dobutamine stress testing: incremental value to conventional wall motion analysis.

Authors:  Grigorios Korosoglou; Dirk Lossnitzer; Dieter Schellberg; Antje Lewien; Angela Wochele; Tim Schaeufele; Mirja Neizel; Henning Steen; Evangelos Giannitsis; Hugo A Katus; Nael F Osman
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2009-01-26       Impact factor: 7.792

Review 6.  Emerging concepts for myocardial late gadolinium enhancement MRI.

Authors:  Adelina Doltra; Brage Hoyem Amundsen; Rolf Gebker; Eckart Fleck; Sebastian Kelle
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rev       Date:  2013-08

7.  Myocardial viability: what we knew and what is new.

Authors:  Adel Shabana; Ayman El-Menyar
Journal:  Cardiol Res Pract       Date:  2012-09-05       Impact factor: 1.866

Review 8.  Revascularization in Severe Left Ventricular Dysfunction: Does Myocardial Viability Even Matter?

Authors:  Pahul Singh; Nishant Sethi; Navneet Kaur; Hani Kozman
Journal:  Clin Med Insights Cardiol       Date:  2015-06-28

Review 9.  Myocardial Viability: From Proof of Concept to Clinical Practice.

Authors:  Aditya Bhat; Gary C H Gan; Timothy C Tan; Chijen Hsu; Alan Robert Denniss
Journal:  Cardiol Res Pract       Date:  2016-05-29       Impact factor: 1.866

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.