| Literature DB >> 22778555 |
Lixia Yang1, Yuming Mu, Luiz Augusto Quaglia, Qi Tang, Lina Guan, Chunmei Wang, Ming Chi Shih.
Abstract
The study aim was to compare two different stress echocardiography interpretation techniques based on the correlation with thrombosis in myocardial infarction (TIMI ) flow grading from acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients. Forty-one patients with suspected ACS were studied before diagnostic coronary angiography with myocardial contrast echocardiography (MCE) at rest and at stress. The correlation of visual interpretation of MCE and TIMI flow grade was significant. The quantitative analysis (myocardial perfusion parameters: A, β, and A × β) and TIMI flow grade were significant. MCE visual interpretation and TIMI flow grade had a high degree of agreement, on diagnosing myocardial perfusion abnormality. If one considers TIMI flow grade <3 as abnormal, MCE visual interpretation at rest had 73.1% accuracy with 58.2% sensitivity and 84.2% specificity and at stress had 80.4% accuracy with 76.6% sensitivity and 83.3% specificity. The MCE quantitative analysis has better accuracy with 100% of agreement with different level of TIMI flow grading. MCE quantitative analysis at stress has showed a direct correlation with TIMI flow grade, more significant than the visual interpretation technique. Further studies could measure the clinical relevance of this more objective approach to managing acute coronary syndrome patient before percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22778555 PMCID: PMC3384979 DOI: 10.1155/2012/806731
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Biomed Biotechnol ISSN: 1110-7243
Demographic and clinical characteristics of 41 patients.
| Variable | Value |
|---|---|
| Age (years) | 54 ±10.8 |
| Men | 34 (82.9%) |
| Previous coronary angioplasty | 0 |
| Previous coronary bypass | 0 |
| Hypertension ( | 26 (63.4%) |
| Diabetes mellitus ( | 15 (36.6%) |
| Smokers ( | 28 (68.3%) |
| AMI | 30 |
| ACS | 11 |
| Diseased arteries | 44 |
| Left anterior descending | 22 (50.0%) |
| Left circumflex coronary artery | 7 (15.9%) |
| Right coronary artery | 15 (34.1%) |
| Single-vessel disease | 28 |
| Multivessel disease | 8 |
| TIMI flow of diseased arteries before PCI <3 | 40 (90.9%) |
| TIMI flow of diseased arteries after PCI <3 | 0 |
| Left ventricular ejection fraction (%) | 47 ± 5 |
| Left ventricular end diastolic volume (mL) | 129 ± 41 |
| Left ventricular end systolic volume (mL) | 66 ± 32 |
Data presented as mean ± SD, unless otherwise noted; data in parentheses are percentages.
TIMI: thrombolysis in myocardial infarction; AMI: acute myocardial infarction; ACS: acute coronary syndrome.
Figure 1Region of interest (ROI, 5 mm × 5 mm) was placed in the middle of the six myocardial segments, and the ROI was tracked manually to assure its center position in each segment. The reperfusion curves of acoustic contrast intensity versus time were constructed automatically with QLab software. The specific values of signal intensity peak (A), the slope of slope of curve (β), and perfusion volume (A × β) were acquired.
MCE visual interpretation at rest among TIMI flow grades before PCI n (%).
| MCE visual interpretation | TIMI flow grades | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 0 | Grade 1 | Grade 2 | Grade 3 | |
| 0 | 31 (64.6) | 9 (11.7) | 8 (6.7) | 9 (2.8) |
| 0.5 | 10 (20.8) | 46 (59.7) | 38 (31.9) | 42 (13.0) |
| 1 | 7 (14.6) | 22 (28.6) | 73 (61.3) | 272 (84.2) |
|
| ||||
| Total | 48 | 77 | 119 | 323 |
TIMI: thrombolysis in myocardial infarction trial; PCI: percutaneous coronary intervention.
MCE visual interpretation at rest and TIMI flow grade correlated positively, rs = 0.691, P < .001.
PCI: percutaneous coronary intervention; TIMI: thrombolysis in myocardial infarction trial.
Grades 0, 1, and 2 were abnormal, grade 3 was normal for TIMI grade. MCE Visual Interpretation 0 and 0.5 were abnormal, and 1 was normal for MCE Visual Interpretation.
On diagnosing myocardial perfusion abnormality TIMI flow grade and MCE Visual Interpretation at rest had a high degree of agreement, Kappa = .687, P < .001.
MCE visual interpretation among at stress TIMI flow grades before PCI n (%).
| MCE visual interpretation | TIMI flow grades | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 0 | Grade 1 | Grade 2 | Grade 3 | |
| 0 | 41 (85.4) | 26 (33.8) | 14 (11.8) | 10 (3.1) |
| 0.5 | 6 (12.5) | 44 (57.1) | 56 (47.1) | 44 (13.6) |
| 1 | 1 (2.1) | 7 (9.1) | 49 (41.2) | 269 (83.3) |
|
| ||||
| Total | 48 | 77 | 119 | 323 |
TIMI, thrombolysis in myocardial infarction trial; PCI, percutaneous coronary intervention.
MCE Visual Interpretation at stress and TIMI flow grade correlated positively, rs = 0.738, P < .001.
PCI, percutaneous coronary intervention; TIMI, thrombolysis in myocardial infarction trial.
Grades 0, 1, and 2 were abnormal, grade 3 was normal for TIMI grade. MCE Visual Interpretation 0 and 0.5 were abnormal, and 1 was normal for MCE Visual Interpretation.
On diagnosing myocardial perfusion abnormality TIMI flow grade and MCE Visual Interpretation at stress had a completely consistent, Kappa = .827, P < .001.
Comparison of myocardial perfusion parameters at rest and stress among TIMI flow grades.
| Myocardial perfusion parameters | TIMI flow grades | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 0 | Grade 1 | Grade 2 | Grade 3 |
|
| |
| A (db): | ||||||
| rest | 1.06 ± 0.02∗§† | 3.17 ± 0.08∗§ | 4.49 ± 0.32∗ | 5.29 ± 0.47 | 382.13 | .000 |
| stress | 1.01 ± 0.06∗§† | 3.09 ± 0.11∗§ | 4.83 ± 0.09∗ | 5.71 ± 0.53∗ | 499.64 | .000 |
|
| ||||||
|
| ||||||
| rest | 0.13 ± 0.02∗§† | 0.17 ± 0.03∗§ | 0.24 ± 0.03∗ | 0.28 ± 0.01 | 192.61 | .000 |
| stress | 0.11 ± 0.06∗§† | 0.23 ± 0.05∗§# | 0.57 ± 0.04∗# | 0.71 ± 0.09∗ | 318.15 | .000 |
|
| ||||||
| A × | ||||||
| rest | 0.14 ± 0.01∗§† | 0.54 ± 0.03∗§ | 1.08 ± 0.02∗ | 1.39 ± 0.04 | 450.96 | .000 |
| stress | 0.11 ± 0.01∗§† | 0.71 ± 0.01∗§# | 2.75 ± 0.09∗# | 4.05 ± 0.11∗ | 601.17 | .000 |
| A-reserve | 0.95 ± 0.08∗§† | 0.98 ± 0.07∗§ | 1.08 ± 0.07∗ | 1.09 ± 0.05 | 452.14 | .000 |
|
| 0.85 ± 0.02∗§† | 1.36 ± 0.02∗§ | 2.37 ± 0.03∗ | 2.54 ± 0.05 | 267.82 | .000 |
| A × | 0.79 ± 0.02∗§† | 1.31 ± 0.03∗§ | 2.55 ± 0.06∗ | 3.11 ± 0.05 | 539.74 | .000 |
A: indicates myocardial blood volume; β: myocardial blood flow velocity; A × β: myocardial blood flow; A-reserve: stress A/rest A; β-reserve: stress β/rest β; A × β-reserve: stress A × β/rest A × β; TIMI: thrombolysis in myocardial infarction trial.
The correlation between the means of A, β, and A × β at rest and TIMI grade reached significant (rs = 0.741, 0.528, and 0.715, resp., P values <.001).
The correlation between the means of A, β, and A × β at stress and TIMI grade reached significant (rs = 0.872, 0.767, and 0.845 for A, β, and A × β, resp., P values <.001).
∗ P < .001 versus TIMI grade 3.
§ P < .001 versus TIMI grade 2.
† P < .001 versus TIMI grade 1.
# P < .001 versus parameter in rest.
∗Welch tests.
Accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of abnormal in MCE Visual Interpretation at rest and stress with different TIMI flow grades as abnormal (%).
| TIMI flow grades | Accuracy | Sensitivity | Specificity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Grade <1: | |||
| rest | 72.0 | 85.4 | 70.7 |
| stress | 65.6 | 97.9 | 62.6 |
|
| |||
| Grade <2: | |||
| rest | 77.7 | 76.8 | 78.1 |
| stress | 76.7 | 93.6 | 71.9 |
|
| |||
| Grade <3: | |||
| rest | 73.1 | 58.2 | 84.2 |
| stress | 80.4 | 76.6 | 83.3 |
TIMI: thrombolysis in myocardial infarction trial.
TIMI grade <1, grade 0 was abnormal, grades 1, 2, and 3 were normal for TIMI grade. TIMI grade <2, grades 0 and 1 were abnormal, grades 2 and 3 were normal for TIMI grade. TIMI Grade <3, grades 0, 1, and 2 were abnormal, grade 3 was normal for TIMI grade.
Figure 2Trend of intergroup reserve of MEC parameters among groups of each coronary artery TIMI grade.
Reproducibility of quantitative assessment of myocardial perfusion parameters.
| A |
| A × | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intraobserver | 0.950 | 0.820 | 0.873 |
| Interobserver | 0.950 | 0.869 | 0.851 |