Literature DB >> 19118722

Safety and efficacy of commercially available ultrasound contrast agents for rest and stress echocardiography a multicenter experience.

Melda S Dolan1, Simil S Gala, Saritha Dodla, Sahar S Abdelmoneim, Feng Xie, David Cloutier, Michelle Bierig, Sharon L Mulvagh, Thomas R Porter, Arthur J Labovitz.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to define the risks versus benefits of ultrasound contrast agents in patients undergoing stress echocardiography.
BACKGROUND: The Food and Drug Administration recently placed a "black box" warning on the ultrasound contrast agents Definity (Bristol-Myers Squibb Medical Imaging, Billerica, Massachusetts) and Optison (GE Healthcare, Princeton, New Jersey) after their use was temporally related to 4 deaths. The safety of contrast has not been systematically evaluated.
METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 42,408 patients at 3 different institutions who had baseline suboptimal images and/or underwent myocardial perfusion imaging and received contrast agents; 18,749 of these underwent stress echocardiography. The outcomes (death and myocardial infarction [MI]) within 30 min, 24 h, and during long-term follow-up were recorded.
RESULTS: No deaths or MIs were observed within 30 min; 1 death and 5 nonfatal MIs were observed within 24 h. This was not different from a matched cohort of 15,989 patients not receiving contrast. At 1 h and at 30 days after contrast administration, no significant differences in death rates or MIs were observed between patients who did and did not receive contrast during their stress echocardiogram. Endocardial border visualization in patients with suboptimal images resulted in comparable sensitivity (81% vs. 73%, p = NS) and diagnostic accuracy (82% vs. 77%, p = NS) for wall motion analysis compared with patients with optimal image quality. At long-term follow-up, abnormal wall motion and/or myocardial perfusion predicted adverse outcomes (20.6%) when compared with patients with normal studies (3.7%).
CONCLUSIONS: Despite recent warnings regarding echocardiographic contrast, our findings indicate it is a safe and useful diagnostic tool in assessment of patients suspected of having coronary artery disease.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19118722     DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2008.08.066

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol        ISSN: 0735-1097            Impact factor:   24.094


  35 in total

1.  Safety of echocardiographic contrast in hospitalized patients with pulmonary hypertension: a multi-center study.

Authors:  Omar Wever-Pinzon; Valentin Suma; Ameeta Ahuja; Jorge Romero; Nishtha Sareen; Sonia A Henry; Maria De Benedetti Zunino; Farhan F Chaudhry; Ramya S Suryadevara; Mark V Sherrid; Farooq A Chaudhry
Journal:  Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2012-03-16       Impact factor: 6.875

2.  Quantification of Microvascular Tortuosity during Tumor Evolution Using Acoustic Angiography.

Authors:  Sarah E Shelton; Yueh Z Lee; Mike Lee; Emmanuel Cherin; F Stuart Foster; Stephen R Aylward; Paul A Dayton
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  2015-04-07       Impact factor: 2.998

Review 3.  [Assessment of systolic function in patients with poor echogenicity: echocardiographic methods].

Authors:  F Weidemann; D Liu; M Niemann; S Herrmann; H Hu; P D Gaudron; G Ertl; K Hu
Journal:  Herz       Date:  2013-08-15       Impact factor: 1.443

Review 4.  Contrast echocardiography: latest developments and clinical utility.

Authors:  Thomas R Porter; Feng Xie
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 2.931

Review 5.  Renal Doppler to assess renal perfusion in the critically ill: a reappraisal.

Authors:  David Schnell; Michael Darmon
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2012-09-22       Impact factor: 17.440

6.  On the relationship between microbubble fragmentation, deflation and broadband superharmonic signal production.

Authors:  Brooks D Lindsey; Juan D Rojas; Paul A Dayton
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  2015-03-09       Impact factor: 2.998

7.  Effect of stress echocardiography testing on changes in cardiovascular risk behaviors in postmenopausal women: a prospective survey study.

Authors:  Francesca Mantovani; Sahar S Abdelmoneim; Victoria Zysek; Susan Eifert-Rain; Sharon L Mulvagh
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2014-06-16       Impact factor: 2.681

8.  Stress echocardiography with contrast for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease: an evidence-based analysis.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ont Health Technol Assess Ser       Date:  2010-06-01

9.  Identification of Need for Ultrasound Enhancing Agent Study (the IN-USE Study).

Authors:  Ariane M Fraiche; Warren J Manning; Sherif F Nagueh; Michael L Main; Lawrence J Markson; Jordan B Strom
Journal:  J Am Soc Echocardiogr       Date:  2020-09-09       Impact factor: 5.251

10.  Quantitative detection of myocardial ischaemia by stress echocardiography; a comparison with SPECT.

Authors:  Petri Gudmundsson; Kambiz Shahgaldi; Reidar Winter; Magnus Dencker; Mariusz Kitlinski; Ola Thorsson; Ronnie B Willenheimer; Lennart Ljunggren
Journal:  Cardiovasc Ultrasound       Date:  2009-06-18       Impact factor: 2.062

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.