Athanasios Katsikis1,2,3, Athanasios Theodorakos4, Spyridon Papaioannou4, Antonios Kalkinis4, Genovefa Kolovou5, Konstantinos Konstantinou6,7, Maria Koutelou4. 1. Nuclear Medicine Department, Onassis Cardiac Surgery Center, Athens, Greece. tkatsikis@gmail.com. 2. Cardiology Department, 401 General Military Hospital of Athens, Athens, Greece. tkatsikis@gmail.com. 3. , Zoodochou Pigis 54, Melissia, Athens, Greece. tkatsikis@gmail.com. 4. Nuclear Medicine Department, Onassis Cardiac Surgery Center, Athens, Greece. 5. Cardiology Department, Onassis Cardiac Surgery Center, Athens, Greece. 6. Cardiology Department, 401 General Military Hospital of Athens, Athens, Greece. 7. Cardiology Department, Ipokration Hospital of Athens, Athens, Greece.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Evaluation of tolerability, safety, and prognostic implications of adenosine stress myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) in octogenarians. METHODS: 370 octogenarians (49% known coronary artery disease) were studied. Hemodynamic response, MPI-related data, and rest-left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) based on echocardiography were registered per patient, and prospective follow-up was performed to document all-cause death (ACD), cardiac death (CD), myocardial infarction (MI), and late revascularization. RESULTS: No deaths or MIs were observed during adenosine infusion or the short-term post-infusion period. 86% of patients were able to tolerate a 6-minute infusion. All side effects terminated spontaneously after infusion cessation, except for one case of pulmonary oedema. After 9.3 years, there were 124 ACDs, 62 CDs, 16 MIs, and 35 revascularizations. Differences between survival curves of summed stress score (SSS)-based risk groups were significant for all end points (P < .001). SSS and LVEF were independent predictors of all end points (P ≤ .01) and lung uptake of cardiac end points. ΔHR <10 bpm (OR = 1.78, P = .004) and inability to increase HR by >10 bpm and decrease systolic blood pressure by >10 mmHg (OR = 2, P = .02) during adenosine infusion were independent predictors of ACD and CD, respectively. Hemodynamic response variables, SSS, and lung uptake provided incremental prognostic value over pre-test data for ACD and CD. CONCLUSIONS: In octogenarians, adenosine stress MPI is well tolerated and provides effective long-term risk stratification.
BACKGROUND: Evaluation of tolerability, safety, and prognostic implications of adenosine stress myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) in octogenarians. METHODS: 370 octogenarians (49% known coronary artery disease) were studied. Hemodynamic response, MPI-related data, and rest-left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) based on echocardiography were registered per patient, and prospective follow-up was performed to document all-cause death (ACD), cardiac death (CD), myocardial infarction (MI), and late revascularization. RESULTS: No deaths or MIs were observed during adenosine infusion or the short-term post-infusion period. 86% of patients were able to tolerate a 6-minute infusion. All side effects terminated spontaneously after infusion cessation, except for one case of pulmonary oedema. After 9.3 years, there were 124 ACDs, 62 CDs, 16 MIs, and 35 revascularizations. Differences between survival curves of summed stress score (SSS)-based risk groups were significant for all end points (P < .001). SSS and LVEF were independent predictors of all end points (P ≤ .01) and lung uptake of cardiac end points. ΔHR <10 bpm (OR = 1.78, P = .004) and inability to increase HR by >10 bpm and decrease systolic blood pressure by >10 mmHg (OR = 2, P = .02) during adenosine infusion were independent predictors of ACD and CD, respectively. Hemodynamic response variables, SSS, and lung uptake provided incremental prognostic value over pre-test data for ACD and CD. CONCLUSIONS: In octogenarians, adenosine stress MPI is well tolerated and provides effective long-term risk stratification.
Authors: Dariush Mozaffarian; Emelia J Benjamin; Alan S Go; Donna K Arnett; Michael J Blaha; Mary Cushman; Sandeep R Das; Sarah de Ferranti; Jean-Pierre Després; Heather J Fullerton; Virginia J Howard; Mark D Huffman; Carmen R Isasi; Monik C Jiménez; Suzanne E Judd; Brett M Kissela; Judith H Lichtman; Lynda D Lisabeth; Simin Liu; Rachel H Mackey; David J Magid; Darren K McGuire; Emile R Mohler; Claudia S Moy; Paul Muntner; Michael E Mussolino; Khurram Nasir; Robert W Neumar; Graham Nichol; Latha Palaniappan; Dilip K Pandey; Mathew J Reeves; Carlos J Rodriguez; Wayne Rosamond; Paul D Sorlie; Joel Stein; Amytis Towfighi; Tanya N Turan; Salim S Virani; Daniel Woo; Robert W Yeh; Melanie B Turner Journal: Circulation Date: 2015-12-16 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Rick A Nishimura; Catherine M Otto; Robert O Bonow; Blase A Carabello; John P Erwin; Robert A Guyton; Patrick T O'Gara; Carlos E Ruiz; Nikolaos J Skubas; Paul Sorajja; Thoralf M Sundt; James D Thomas Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2014-03-03 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: E Tadamura; T Kudoh; M Motooka; M Inubushi; S Shirakawa; N Hattori; T Okada; T Matsuda; T Koshiji; K Nishimura; K Matsuda; J Konishi Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 1999-03-15 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: A Hashimoto; E L Palmar; J A Scott; S A Abraham; A J Fischman; T L Force; J B Newell; C A Rabito; G D Zervos; T Yasuda Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 1999 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: R Giubbini; R Campini; E Milan; O Zoccarato; C Orlandi; P Rossini; P Giannuzzi; G La Canna; M Galli Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 1995-01 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Luiz Eduardo Mastrocola; Barbara Juarez Amorim; João Vicente Vitola; Simone Cristina Soares Brandão; Gabriel Blacher Grossman; Ronaldo de Souza Leão Lima; Rafael Willain Lopes; William Azem Chalela; Lara Cristiane Terra Ferreira Carreira; José Roberto Nolasco de Araújo; Cláudio Tinoco Mesquita; José Claudio Meneghetti Journal: Arq Bras Cardiol Date: 2020-02 Impact factor: 2.000