Literature DB >> 23696598

Residual ischemia after revascularization in multivessel coronary artery disease: insights from measurement of absolute myocardial blood flow using magnetic resonance imaging compared with angiographic assessment.

Jayanth R Arnold1, Theodoros D Karamitsos, William J van Gaal, Luca Testa, Jane M Francis, Paul Bhamra-Ariza, Ali Ali, Joseph B Selvanayagam, Steve Westaby, Rana Sayeed, Michael Jerosch-Herold, Stefan Neubauer, Adrian P Banning.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Revascularization strategies for multivessel coronary artery disease include percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass grafting. In this study, we compared the completeness of revascularization as assessed by coronary angiography and by quantitative serial perfusion imaging using cardiovascular magnetic resonance. METHODS AND
RESULTS: Patients with multivessel coronary disease were recruited into a randomized trial of treatment with either coronary artery bypass grafting or percutaneous coronary intervention. Angiographic disease burden was determined by the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI) myocardial jeopardy index. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance first-pass perfusion imaging was performed before and 5 to 6 months after revascularization. Using model-independent deconvolution, hyperemic myocardial blood flow was evaluated, and ischemic burden was quantified. Sixty-seven patients completed follow-up (33 coronary artery bypass grafting and 34 percutaneous coronary intervention). The myocardial jeopardy index was 80.7±15.2% at baseline and 6.9±11.3% after revascularization (P<0.0001), with revascularization deemed complete in 62.7% of patients. Relative to cardiovascular magnetic resonance, angiographic assessment overestimated disease burden at baseline (80.7±15.2% versus 49.9±29.2% [P<0.0001]), but underestimated it postprocedure (6.9±11.3% versus 28.1±33.4% [P<0.0001]). Fewer patients achieved complete revascularization based on functional criteria than on angiographic assessment (38.8% versus 62.7%; P=0.015). After revascularization, hyperemic myocardial blood flow was significantly higher in segments supplied by arterial bypass grafts than those supplied by venous grafts (2.04±0.82 mL/min per gram versus 1.89±0.81 mL/min per gram, respectively; P=0.04).
CONCLUSIONS: Angiographic assessment may overestimate disease burden before revascularization, and underestimate residual ischemia after revascularization. Functional data demonstrate that a significant burden of ischemia remains even after angiographically defined successful revascularization.

Entities:  

Keywords:  bypass surgery; revascularization; stent

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23696598     DOI: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.112.000064

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Interv        ISSN: 1941-7640            Impact factor:   6.546


  3 in total

1.  The assessment of ischaemic burden: validation of a functional jeopardy score against cardiovascular magnetic resonance perfusion imaging.

Authors:  Shazia T Hussain; Geraint Morton; Kalpa De Silva; Roy Jogiya; Andreas Schuster; Matthias Paul; Divaka Perera; Eike Nagel
Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol       Date:  2016-10-20       Impact factor: 5.460

2.  Rosuvastatin relieves myocardial ischemia/reperfusion injury by upregulating PPAR‑γ and UCP2.

Authors:  Ling Wang; Rong Lin; Langtao Guo; Meiman Hong
Journal:  Mol Med Rep       Date:  2018-05-23       Impact factor: 2.952

Review 3.  Non-invasive Ischaemia Testing in Patients With Prior Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery: Technical Challenges, Limitations, and Future Directions.

Authors:  Andreas Seraphim; Kristopher D Knott; Joao B Augusto; Katia Menacho; Sara Tyebally; Benjamin Dowsing; Sanjeev Bhattacharyya; Leon J Menezes; Daniel A Jones; Rakesh Uppal; James C Moon; Charlotte Manisty
Journal:  Front Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2021-12-23
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.