Literature DB >> 17566697

Head-to-head comparison of dobutamine and adenosine stress real-time myocardial perfusion echocardiography for the detection of coronary artery disease.

Ingrid Kowatsch1, Jeane M Tsutsui, Altamiro F F Osório, Augusto H Uchida, Gilberto G A Machiori, Marden L Lopes, Luiz A M César, José Antônio F Ramires, Wilson Mathias.   

Abstract

We sought to determine the value of dobutamine versus adenosine real-time myocardial perfusion (MP) echocardiography for detecting coronary artery disease and the value of quantitative analysis of MP over electrocardiography, wall motion, and qualitative MP. We studied 54 patients by real-time MP echocardiography and coronary angiography. Replenishment velocity (beta) and an index of myocardial blood flow (A(n)xbeta) were derived from quantitative MP. During dobutamine stress, beta (1.7 +/- 0.7 vs 2.7 +/- 1.2; P < .001) and A(n)xbeta (2.2 +/- 1.0 vs 3.5 +/- 1.6; P < .001) reserves were lower in patients with coronary artery disease. The same was observed with adenosine for beta (1.7 +/- 0.8 vs 2.5 +/- 1.1; P < .001) and A(n)xbeta (1.9 +/- 0.7 vs 3.2 +/- 1.4; P < .001) reserves. Accuracy of electrocardiography, wall motion, qualitative MP, and quantitative MP were 61%, 76%, 76%, and 80% for dobutamine and 70%, 70%, 76%, and 80% for adenosine, respectively. Quantitative MP had incremental diagnostic value over other variables during dobutamine (chi(2) 23.7-38.4; P < .001) and adenosine (chi(2) 26.7-59.4; P < .001). In conclusion, dobutamine and adenosine real-time MP echocardiography hold similar accuracy for detecting coronary artery disease. Quantitative MP provides incremental diagnostic information over other variables.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17566697     DOI: 10.1016/j.echo.2007.02.008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Soc Echocardiogr        ISSN: 0894-7317            Impact factor:   5.251


  6 in total

1.  Diagnostic accuracy of contrast echocardiography during adenosine stress for detection of abnormal myocardial perfusion: a prospective comparison with technetium-99 m sestamibi single-photon emission computed tomography.

Authors:  Sahar S Abdelmoneim; Mathieu Bernier; Abhijeet Dhoble; Stuart Moir; Mary E Hagen; Sue Ann C Ness; Patricia A Pellikka; Samir S Abdel-Kader; Sharon L Mulvagh
Journal:  Heart Vessels       Date:  2010-03-26       Impact factor: 2.037

Review 2.  Diagnostic performance of stress myocardial perfusion imaging for coronary artery disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Marcus C de Jong; Tessa S S Genders; Robert-Jan van Geuns; Adriaan Moelker; M G Myriam Hunink
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2012-04-19       Impact factor: 5.315

3.  Evaluation of cardiac masses by real-time perfusion imaging echocardiography.

Authors:  Eliza K Uenishi; Márcia A Caldas; Jeane M Tsutsui; Maria C D Abduch; João C N Sbano; Roberto Kalil Filho; Wilson Mathias
Journal:  Cardiovasc Ultrasound       Date:  2015-05-02       Impact factor: 2.062

4.  Prognostic value of dobutamine stress myocardial perfusion echocardiography in patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease and normal left ventricular function.

Authors:  Angele A A Mattoso; Jeane M Tsutsui; Ingrid Kowatsch; Vitória Y L Cruz; João C N Sbano; Henrique B Ribeiro; Roberto Kalil Filho; Thomas R Porter; Wilson Mathias
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-02-24       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Microcirculation function assessed by adenosine triphosphate stress myocardial contrast echocardiography and prognosis in patients with nonobstructive coronary artery disease.

Authors:  Ning Yang; Ya-Fen Su; Wei-Wei Li; Shan-Shan Wang; Chao-Qun Zhao; Bi-Yu Wang; Hui Liu; Meng Guo; Wei Han
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2019-07       Impact factor: 1.817

6.  Head to head comparisons of two modalities of perfusion adenosine stress echocardiography with simultaneous SPECT.

Authors:  Petri Gudmundsson; Kambiz Shahgaldi; Reidar Winter; Magnus Dencker; Mariusz Kitlinski; Ola Thorsson; Lennart Ljunggren; Ronnie B Willenheimer
Journal:  Cardiovasc Ultrasound       Date:  2009-04-20       Impact factor: 2.062

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.