Literature DB >> 26403144

Relationships between left ventricular asynchrony and myocardial blood flow.

Andrew Van Tosh1,2, John R Votaw3, C David Cooke3, Nathaniel Reichek4, Christopher J Palestro5, Kenneth J Nichols5.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: 82Rb PET protocols enable determination of left ventricular asynchrony (LVAS) at rest and stress, along with myocardial blood flow (MBF). We hypothesized that in patients with resting LVAS, MBF differs between those with stress-induced LVAS improvement and those with stress-induced LVAS deterioration.
METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 82Rb rest/regadenoson stress PET studies of 195 patients evaluated for known or suspected coronary artery disease. MBF was computed from first-pass data; function and relative perfusion were computed from myocardial equilibrium data. LVAS was defined as phase contraction bandwidth (BW) above 82Rb gender-specific normal limits, with changes defined as BW moving into or out of normal ranges.
RESULTS: Among the 195 patients, 64 had LVAS at rest, of whom 13 reverted to normal and 51 continued to have LVAS with stress. Patients who did not improve had lower stress MBF (1.04 ± 0.69 vs 1.58 ± 0.67, p = .02) and coronary flow reserve (1.94 ± 1.16 vs 3.04 ± 1.22, p = .01) than those who did improve. ROC analysis indicated that the parameter most strongly associated with improvement in asynchrony for patients with resting LVAS was reduction in MBF heterogeneity (ROC area (accuracy) = 84%, sensitivity = 92%, and specificity = 67%).
CONCLUSION: LVAS is highly correlated with MBF and CVR, with stress-induced improvement in synchronicity most strongly associated with improved MBF homogeneity.

Entities:  

Keywords:  PET/CT; asynchrony; coronary flow reserve; rubidium isotopes

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26403144     DOI: 10.1007/s12350-015-0270-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol        ISSN: 1071-3581            Impact factor:   5.952


  6 in total

1.  Can LV dyssynchrony as assessed with phase analysis on gated myocardial perfusion SPECT predict response to CRT?

Authors:  Maureen M Henneman; Ji Chen; Petra Dibbets-Schneider; Marcel P Stokkel; Gabe B Bleeker; Claudia Ypenburg; Ernst E van der Wall; Martin J Schalij; Ernest V Garcia; Jeroen J Bax
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2007-06-15       Impact factor: 10.057

2.  Left ventricular mechanical synchrony from stress and rest 82Rb PET myocardial perfusion ECG-gated studies: differentiating normal from LBBB patients.

Authors:  C David Cooke; Fabio P Esteves; Ji Chen; Ernest V Garcia
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2011-09-17       Impact factor: 5.952

3.  Left ventricular dyssynchrony predicts response and prognosis after cardiac resynchronization therapy.

Authors:  Jeroen J Bax; Gabe B Bleeker; Thomas H Marwick; Sander G Molhoek; Eric Boersma; Paul Steendijk; Ernst E van der Wall; Martin J Schalij
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2004-11-02       Impact factor: 24.094

4.  Association of left ventricular mechanical dyssynchrony with survival benefit from revascularization: a study of gated positron emission tomography in patients with ischemic LV dysfunction and narrow QRS.

Authors:  Wael AlJaroudi; M Chadi Alraies; Rory Hachamovitch; Wael A Jaber; Richard Brunken; Manuel D Cerqueira; Thomas Marwick
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2012-06-15       Impact factor: 9.236

5.  Preoperative ejection fraction as a predictor of survival after coronary artery bypass grafting: comparison with a matched general population.

Authors:  Mohamed A Soliman Hamad; Albert H M van Straten; Jacques P A M Schönberger; Joost F ter Woorst; Andre M de Wolf; Elisabeth J Martens; André A J van Zundert
Journal:  J Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2010-04-23       Impact factor: 1.637

Review 6.  Left ventricular dyssynchrony assessment using myocardial single-photon emission CT.

Authors:  Prem Soman; Ji Chen
Journal:  Semin Nucl Med       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 4.446

  6 in total
  6 in total

Review 1.  Updates on Stress Imaging Testing and Myocardial Viability With Advanced Imaging Modalities.

Authors:  Sandeep S Hedgire; Michael Osborne; Daniel J Verdini; Brian B Ghoshhajra
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2017-04

Review 2.  Review of cardiovascular imaging in the Journal of Nuclear Cardiology 2017. Part 1 of 2: Positron emission tomography, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance.

Authors:  Wael A AlJaroudi; Fadi G Hage
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2017-11-08       Impact factor: 5.952

3.  Vasodilator stress and left ventricular asynchrony.

Authors:  Saurabh Malhotra; John M Canty
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2015-10-22       Impact factor: 5.952

4.  Left ventricular regional asynchrony: Earliest marker for ischemic cardiomyopathy?

Authors:  Aviral Vij; Saurabh Malhotra
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2020-09-08       Impact factor: 5.952

Review 5.  Phase analysis of gated PET in the evaluation of mechanical ventricular synchrony: A narrative overview.

Authors:  Luis Eduardo Juarez-Orozco; Andrea Monroy-Gonzalez; Niek H J Prakken; Walter Noordzij; Juhani Knuuti; Robert A deKemp; Riemer H J A Slart
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2019-03-04       Impact factor: 5.952

6.  Ventricular synchrony is not significantly determined by absolute myocardial perfusion in patients with chronic heart failure: A 13N-ammonia PET study.

Authors:  Luis Eduardo Juarez-Orozco; Andrea G Monroy-Gonzalez; Friso M van der Zant; Nick Hoogvorst; Riemer H J A Slart; Remco J J Knol
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2018-11-15       Impact factor: 5.952

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.