Real-time perfusion imaging: a new echocardiographic technique for simultaneous evaluation of myocardial perfusion and contraction

Myocardial contrast echocardiography (MCE) with high acoustic energy and triggered harmonic imaging is the best established ultrasound technique to date for the assessment of myocardial perfusion. With this technique, however, the ultimate goal of MCE (noninvasive real-time simultaneous assessment of myocardial perfusion and function after an intravenous injection of microbubbles) is not met. Recently, technologic advances have enabled myocardial opacification to be visualized during low-energy real-time imaging. During real-time perfusion imaging, wall motion and myocardial perfusion may be assessed simultaneously, obviating the need of the presently time-consuming combination of different imaging modalities. When high-energy ultrasound bursts are periodically transmitted to produce bubble destruction during low-power imaging, the consecutive frames after destruction delineate the restoration of contrast intensity. Microbubble replenishment rate and peak intensity may be determined subsequently, and provide reliable quantitative parameters of regional microcirculatory flow. This review will introduce the modalities used for real-time perfusion imaging with focus on power pulse inversion imaging and quantitative analysis. Furthermore, we will describe the clinical role the technique may have in the identification of coronary artery disease, quantification of coronary stenosis severity, assessment of myocardial viability, determination of infarction size, and evaluation of reflow and no- or low-reflow after acute myocardial infarction.     

Potential clinical applications of myocardial contrast echocardiography in evaluating myocardial perfusion in coronary artery disease

Myocardial contrast echocardiography (MCE) is a relatively new technique that uses microbubbles to produce myocardial opacification. Recent advances in echocardiography have resulted in improved detection of microbubbles within the myocardium allowing combined acquisition of function and perfusion data, thus making MCE suitable for bedside use. Regardless of the imaging modality chosen or the type of stress used, MCE detects changes developing in the coronary microcirculation, providing important information for the evaluation of severity of coronary artery disease and for the detection of viable myocardial tissue in acute or chronic coronary artery disease.     

不同程度狭窄病变冠心病患者介入治疗后心肌灌注变化及临床意义

目的利用经冠状动脉超声心肌声学造影（MCE）比较单支血管不同程度狭窄病变冠心病患者经皮冠状动脉介入术（PCI）后心肌灌注的变化,并探讨其临床意义。方法62例进行PCI治疗的住院患者根据选择性冠状动脉造影结果,按血管狭窄程度分组:A组,血管狭窄75%95%;B组,血管狭窄>95%;C组,急性血管闭塞。PCI前及术后15 min进行经冠状动脉MCE,检测心肌灌注状况。其中,MCE有关定量参数分别为:造影剂峰值密度反映心肌血容量;峰值时间反映心肌灌注速度;曲线下面积反映心肌血流量。结果所有患者PC I后均达到TIMIⅢ级血流;A组术后心肌血流量较术前增加（P<0.05）;B组心肌血容量及血流量也较术前增加（P<0.05）;而C组心肌血容量、血流量及灌注速度较术前增加更显著（P<0.01）。结论不同狭窄程度病变冠心病患者,PCI后心肌灌注均得到不同程度改善,其中,以急性闭塞病变改善最明显,该类患者为PCI治疗的最大获益者。     

Myocardial contrast echography. History, methodology and clinical applications

Recent studies have demonstrated the usefulness of myocardial contrast echocardiography (MCE) in studying myocardial perfusion. Several first and second generation contrast agent such as Levovist, Sonovue, Optison, Definity and Imagent are commercially available or close to be introduced into the market. Use of MCE allowed the clinical demonstration of no-reflow phenomenon in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) after recanalization of the infarct related artery (IRA). Coronary angiography is unable to assess the microvascular damage as showed by the poor correlation between TIMI grading and perfusion score evaluated by MCE. Furthermore, the use of MCE is important to determine coronary stenosis, to identify microvascular damage during ischaemia-reperfusion and to evaluate the presence of collateral circulation in the area at risk. MCE seems to be the most effective technique for assessing microvascular integrity after reperfusion as compared to TIMI myocardial perfusion grade, nuclear myocardial perfusion imaging and magnetic resonance imaging. These techniques are expensive, invasive and not available in most of the hospitals. Furthermore, as compared to nuclear medicine and echo-dobutamine, MCE has greater specificity and higher accuracy in detecting coronary artery disease. Recent studies showed that not only primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) but also rescue and delayed PCI reduced microvascular damage and that MCE play a key role in assessing myocardial salvage after reperfusion. The most exciting aspect of MCE is the independent role in predicting left ventricular (LV) remodelling and functional recovery. The extent on no-reflow is an important predictor of LV dysfunction and remodelling at follow-up. Several studies have demonstrated that the extent of infarct-zone viability is a powerful independent predictor of LV dilation. There is a close relationship between the extent of microvascular damage, the extension of necrosis, the site of AMI and LV remodelling. We demonstrated that MCE performed 24 hours after reperfusion, at 1 week and 6 months appears to provide important prognostic information. These data support the daily use of MCE in coronary care unit and could establish a strategy for clinical decision making in patients with AMI.     

Contrast echocardiography for the assessment of myocardial viability

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The availability of an accurate, non-invasive method for distinguishing viable from irreversibly damaged myocardium, after acute myocardial infarction or in chronic coronary artery disease, is important in clinical decision making. Such a tool would enable physicians to identify patients most likely to benefit from revascularization strategies in patients with coronary artery disease and left ventricular dysfunction. Myocardial contrast echocardiography is a new technique that utilizes acoustically active gas-filled microspheres (microbubbles), which remain exclusively in the intravascular space and allow the simultaneous assessment of global and regional myocardial structure, function, and perfusion. An increasing body of data supports its role in assessing myocardial viability and predicting the recovery of function. RECENT FINDINGS: Myocardial contrast echocardiography accurately differentiates 'stunning' from necrosis, delineates transmural extent of infarction, predicts recovery of regional and global left ventricular systolic function in the recuperative phase, identifies patients at high risk of left ventricular remodelling, and provides incremental viability data when performed in conjunction with low-dose dobutamine echocardiography. SUMMARY: Technological advances have positioned myocardial contrast echocardiography as a safe, practical bedside technique for the evaluation of myocardial viability. It has comparable accuracy with other non-invasive imaging techniques, such as dobutamine stress echocardiography, radionuclide scintigraphy and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging.     

Assessment of myocardial viability using myocardial contrast echocardiography

Myocardial contrast echocardiography (MCE) is a technique that uses microbubbles as a tracer during simultaneous ultrasound of the heart. The microbubbles can be used to provide quantitative information regarding the adequacy of myocardial blood flow (MBF), as well as the spatial extent of microvascular integrity. In acute myocardial infarction, MCE can identify the presence of collateral flow within the risk area, and can therefore predict preservation of myocardial viability and ultimate infarct size even prior to reperfusion. After reperfusion, the extent of microvascular no-reflow can be determined, and has significant implications for recovery of left ventricular function. In chronic ischemic heart disease, MCE has also been shown to successfully differentiate viable from necrotic myocardium. This technique can accurately predict recovery of function after revascularization. More importantly, MCE can be used to identify viable segments that may help to prevent infarct expansion and remodeling, and thus improve patient outcomes.     

Myocardial contrast echocardiography evolving as a clinically feasible technique for accurate, rapid, and safe assessment of myocardial perfusion: the evidence so far

Intravenous myocardial contrast echocardiography (MCE) is a recently developed technique for assessment of myocardial perfusion. Up to now, many studies have demonstrated that the sensitivity and specificity of qualitative assessment of myocardial perfusion by MCE in patients with acute and chronic ischemic heart disease are comparable with other techniques such as cardiac scintigraphy and dobutamine stress echocardiography. Furthermore, quantitative parameters of myocardial perfusion derived from MCE correlate well with the current clinical standard for this purpose, positron emission tomography. Myocardial contrast echocardiography provides a promising and valuable tool for assessment of myocardial perfusion. Although MCE has been primarily performed for medical research, its implementation in routine clinical care is evolving. This article is intended to give an overview of the current status of MCE.     

Myocardial contrast echocardiography evolving as a clinically feasible technique for accurate, rapid, and safe assessment of myocardial perfusion: the evidence so far.

Intravenous myocardial contrast echocardiography (MCE) is a recently developed technique for assessment of myocardial perfusion. Up to now, many studies have demonstrated that the sensitivity and specificity of qualitative assessment of myocardial perfusion by MCE in patients with acute and chronic ischemic heart disease are comparable with other techniques such as cardiac scintigraphy and dobutamine stress echocardiography. Furthermore, quantitative parameters of myocardial perfusion derived from MCE correlate well with the current clinical standard for this purpose, positron emission tomography. Myocardial contrast echocardiography provides a promising and valuable tool for assessment of myocardial perfusion. Although MCE has been primarily performed for medical research, its implementation in routine clinical care is evolving. This article is intended to give an overview of the current status of MCE.     

Myocardial contrast echocardiography in the evaluation of myocardial perfusion in patients with left bundle branch block and coronary artery disease.

BACKGROUND: In patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB), conventional tests such as electrocardiography and myocardial scintigraphy poorly evaluate coronary artery disease. It has been reported that myocardial contrast echocardiography (MCE) is capable of identifying patients with a postinfarction contractile reserve and myocardial functional recovery, also allowing the early identification of late left ventricular remodeling. The purpose of this study was to evaluate, retrospectively, myocardial perfusion in selected patients with LBBB. METHODS: Thirty patients (mean age 56 +/- 8 years) with LBBB, 15 with normal coronary arteries at angiography and 15 with a previous myocardial infarction and a critical one-vessel residual stenosis at angiography, underwent MCE from June 2000 to May 2001. MCE results were compared with rest thallium-201 myocardial scintigraphy. RESULTS: Among 15 LBBB patients with normal coronary arteries, MCE demonstrated normal perfusion in 14 patients, whereas 1 subject showed an impairment of septal perfusion. In the same group, rest thallium-201 myocardial scintigraphy showed an impaired septal perfusion in 14 patients, whereas 1 subject had a normal perfusion (MCE specificity 93% vs myocardial scintigraphy specificity 7%). Among 15 LBBB patients with coronary artery disease, MCE correctly identified a contrast defect in 14/15 patients, whereas rest thallium-201 myocardial scintigraphy demonstrated a perfusion defect in 15/15 patients (MCE sensitivity 93% vs scintigraphy sensitivity 100%). The two techniques showed a good agreement as for myocardial perfusion in the anterior wall (86.6% anterobasal; 86.6% mid-anterior; 80% distal anterior), the inferior wall (86.6%), the distal segment of the posterior lateral wall (83.3%), but a low concordance was found as for the basal septum (16.6%) and middistal septum (33.3%). CONCLUSIONS: MCE allows a diagnostic benefit in the detection of microvascular damage in patients with LBBB and unknown coronary artery disease, also in the presence of discordance with rest thallium-201 myocardial scintigraphy.     

Comparison of real-time myocardial contrast echocardiography for the assessment of myocardial viability with fluorodeoxyglucose-18 positron emission tomography and dobutamine stress echocardiography

Little is known about the diagnostic value of real-time myocardial contrast echocardiography (MCE) for the assessment of myocardial viability. We compared the diagnostic accuracy of MCE with that of low-dose dobutamine stress echocardiography (DSE) and of combined technetium-99 sestamibi single-photon emission computed tomography and fluorodeoxyglucose-18 positron emission tomography and investigated whether quantitative assessment of myocardial blood flow could increase its diagnostic value. Cardiac imaging was performed with these 3 methods in 41 patients who had ischemic heart disease (ejection fraction < 40%) and were being considered for revascularization. Follow-up echocardiograms were obtained after 3 to 6 months in revascularized patients, and increased regional function served as a standard reference for assessment of myocardial viability. A control group of 25 patients who had no coronary artery disease underwent MCE to assess normal values of myocardial perfusion parameters. Recovery of myocardial function was predicted by MCE with a sensitivity of 86% and a specificity of 43%. Nuclear imaging was comparably sensitive (90%) and specific (44%), whereas low-dose DSE was similarly sensitive (83%) but more specific (76%). Normalization of myocardial signal intensity to that of the control group significantly increased the specificity of MCE from 43% to 64% and the accuracy from 73% to 81%. A combination of quantitative MCE and DSE provided the best diagnostic characteristics, with a sensitivity of 96%, a specificity of 63%, and an accuracy of 83%. Thus, MCE is useful for assessing myocardial viability. Normalization of contrast intensity to that of a reference control group is a valid approach for detection of myocardial viability and expands on information obtained from visual MCE and DSE.     

Assessment of Myocardial Viability in Patients With Postischemic Left Ventricular Dysfunction: Role of Myocardial Contrast Echocardiography

The distinction between viable and nonviable dysfunctional left ventricular (LV) segments after acute myocardial infarction is very important, because revascularization increases survival only in patients with viable myocardial tissue. Recent studies have highlighted a mismatch between two highly specific investigations for viability assessment: dobutamine echocardiography, which measures inotropic reserve, and myocardial contrast echocardiography (MCE), which measures microvascular perfusion. Viability and functional reserve are not synonymous. Maintenance of microvascular perfusion, independently of functional reserve, attenuates left ventricular remodelling, reduces the risk of major cardiac events, and increases survival. MCE provides similar perfusion information as myocardial blush, but image quality is much higher. Quantitative analysis of digital data provides more accurate diagnostic MCE information than qualitative analysis of video signal intensity. In a recent study relating MCE findings to histologic data, MCE-derived quantitative data were closely correlated with microvascular density and capillary area, and inversely correlated with collagen content. One of the contrast agents routinely used for MCE is SonoVue, a second generation microbubble contrast agent, which is characterized by high response to ultrasound energy, ease of destruction at high energy, and strong harmonic signal at low energy. Recommendations for the assessment of postischemic LV dysfunction: routine use of MCE, followed by dobutamine echocardiography if perfusion is documented. If MCE is negative, revascularization is not indicated; if both tests are positive, revascularization is strongly recommended; if they are discordant, useful information can be obtained by assessing the extent of ²⁰¹T1 viability. (ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY, Volume 20, Supplement 1, 2003)     

Limitations and potential clinical application on contrast echocardiography

Myocardial contrast echocardiography (MCE) is a relatively simple myocardial perfusion imaging technique which should be used in different clinical settings. The ability of MCE to provide a comprehensive assessment of cardiac structure, function, and perfusion is likely to make it the technique of choice for non-invasive cardiac imaging.Contrast agents are encapsulated microbubbles (MB) filled with either air or high-molecular-weight gas. They are innocuous, biologically inert and when administered intravasculary, the sound backscatter from the blood poll is enhanced because MB have the enormous reflective ability due to a large acoustic impedance mismatch between the bubble gas and surrounding blood.MCE is an ideal imaging tool for the assessment of left heart contrast and the myocardial microcirculation. MCE detects contrast MB at the capillary level within the myocardium and, thus, has the potential to assess tissue viability and the duration of the contrast effect. MCE was equivalent to SPECT for the detection of CAD with a tendency toward higher sensitivity of MCE compared with SPECT in microvascular disease and CAD. MCE is also a bedside technique that can be used early in patients presenting with acute heart failure to rapidly assess LV function (regional and global) and perfusion (rest and stress).     

Usefulness and pitfalls in myocardial perfusion SPECT for detecting and assessing coronary artery disease

Thallium-201(Tl) is the dominant agent employed for myocardial perfusion imaging for detection of coronary artery disease, assessment of myocardial viability and prognostication. Technetium-99m(Tc) labeled radionuclides have been used as excellent alternatives to Tl. This paper will review the usefulness and pitfall in myocardial perfusion single photon emission computed tomography(SPECT) in patients with coronary artery disease. From a practical standpoint, we should know what are clinical questions, clinical status of patients(history and exercise ability of patients, obesity) and diagnostic accuracy of each diagnostic protocol and the performance in the nuclear laboratory. Myocardial perfusion defects during stress SPECT are produced by a heterogeneity in coronary blood flow, which depends on severity of coronary stenosis and consequent abnormalities in flow reserve. Certain factors can affect sensitivity and specificity of Tl SPECT for detection of coronary artery disease. Accurate determination of myocardial viability is vitally important for clinical decision making for patients with left ventricular(LV) dysfunction who will most benefit from revascularization. Hibernated myocardium may result in profound regional LV dysfunction in absence of necrosis. The various approach such as stress-redistribution-reinjection imaging, rest-redistribution imaging and rest-redistribution 24 hours delayed imaging has been utilized to assess myocardial viability with Tl. Alternatively, quantitative assessment of 99mTc-methoxy-isobutyl isonitrile(MIBI) and tetrofosmin uptake reflect the degree of viability. At the present time one of the most important clinical applications of exercise myocardial perfusion SPECT is the assessment of prognosis for patients with suspected and documented coronary artery disease. Patients with normal stress perfusion SPECT have a low event rate and excellent prognosis. Stress perfusion imagings have been widely used to stratify patients into different risk groups in the United State.     

Quantitative intravenous myocardial contrast echocardiography predicts recovery of left ventricular function after revascularization in chronic coronary artery disease

BACKGROUND: Quantitative intravenous myocardial contrast echocardiography (MCE) has been shown to measure regional myocardial blood flow velocity noninvasively. PURPOSE: To determine whether quantitative intravenous MCE could be used clinically to predict functional recovery after revascularization in patients with chronic coronary artery disease. METHODS: Twenty-eight patients with chronic stable coronary artery disease and resting regional left ventricular dysfunction were included in this study. The study permits myocardial perfusion analysis by intravenous MCE before revascularization with continuous infusion of Levovist and intermittent ultrasonic exposure. Wall motion assessment by echocardiography at rest was repeated after long-term follow-up period (7 +/- 2 months). In dysfunctional segments, we analyzed myocardial perfusion quantitatively by fitting to an exponential function, Y = A(1 - e-betat) to obtain the rate of rise (beta) of background-subtracted intensity, which represented myocardial blood flow velocity. RESULTS: Of the 101 revascularized dysfunctional segments, MCE was adequately visualized in 91 (90%) segments, and wall motion was recovered in 45 (49%) segments. The value of beta in the recovery segments was significantly higher than that in nonrecovery segments (0.80 +/- 0.50 vs 0.39 +/- 0.24, P < 0.001). The value of beta > 0.5 predicted recovery of segmental function with a sensitivity of 71%, specificity of 78%. CONCLUSION: Quantitative intravenous MCE can predict functional recovery after revascularization in patients with chronic coronary artery disease.     

超声心肌声学造影评价冠状动脉狭窄程度对心肌灌注的影响

目的经冠状动脉超声心肌声学造影(MCE)检测基础状态下不同狭窄程度冠状动脉所供应心肌组织灌注状况。方法30例患者行选择性冠状动脉造影,按有无冠状动脉病变及病变血管狭窄程度,将所涉及的共93个心肌节段分为对照组(18个)和病变组(75个),其中病变组又分为轻度狭窄组(12个)、中度狭窄组(28个)、重度狭窄组(35个);超声声学造影剂由冠状动脉直接注入,完成MCE。对心肌灌注进行定性分析,并由心肌灌注时间强度曲线进行定量分析。结果112个心肌节段中有93个(83.0%)获得较满意图像,经视觉判断,病变组共75个心肌节段中,正常灌注的为58个(77.3%),低灌注为17个(22.7%),其中,轻度狭窄组均为正常心肌灌注。定量分析显示,重度狭窄组反映心肌灌注的3个参数值与对照组均存在明显差异(P<0.05);而轻、中度狭窄组各参数值与对照组无明显差异。结论基础状态下,狭窄程度>90%的冠状动脉病变,其心肌组织灌注水平较正常偏低;而当血管狭窄程度≤90%时,心肌灌注水平与正常相似。     

MRI for the diagnosis of myocardial ischemia and viability

Assessment of myocardial ischemia and viability plays a crucial role in the clinical management of patients with coronary artery disease. Recently, cardiovascular MRI has emerged as an important noninvasive diagnostic modality in the assessment of coronary artery disease. MRI is able to evaluate both myocardial perfusion as well as myocardial contractile reserve. Because of its superior spatial resolution, integration of qualitative and quantitative methodology, and excellent reproducibility, MRI has advantages over conventional noninvasive modalities currently used in the evaluation of myocardial ischemia and viability, and may well emerge as the premier noninvasive technique in the assessment of patients with coronary artery disease. The authors review the rapidly expanding recent literature that has now established cardiovascular MRI (including dobutamine cine MRI and vasodilator perfusion MRI techniques) as an ideal choice in the evaluation of myocardial ischemia and delayed contrast-enhanced MRI and low-dose dobutamine cine MRI for evaluation of viability. Comparisons with more established techniques such as dobutamine stress echocardiography, single photon emission computed tomography perfusion imaging, and positron emission tomography are reviewed.     

Economics of myocardial perfusion imaging in Europe--the EMPIRE Study.

BACKGROUND: Physicians use myocardial perfusion imaging to a variable extent in patients presenting with possible coronary artery disease. There are few clinical data on the most cost-effective strategy although computer models predict that routine use of myocardial perfusion imaging is cost-effective. OBJECTIVES: To measure the cost-effectiveness of four diagnostic strategies in patients newly presenting with possible coronary artery disease, and to compare cost-effectiveness in centres that routinely use myocardial perfusion imaging with those that do not. METHODS: We have studied 396 patients presenting to eight hospitals for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease. The hospitals were regular users or non-users of myocardial perfusion imaging with one of each in four countries (France, Germany, Italy, United Kingdom). Information was gathered retrospectively on presentation, investigations, complications, and clinical management, and patients were followed-up for 2 years in order to assess outcome. Pre- and post-test probabilities of coronary artery disease were computed for diagnostic tests and each test was also assigned as diagnostic or part of management. Diagnostic strategies defined were: 1: Exercise electrocardiogram/coronary angiography, 2: exercise electrocardiogram/myocardial perfusion imaging/coronary angiography, 3: myocardial perfusion imaging/coronary angiography, 4: coronary angiography. Primary outcome measures were the cost and accuracy of diagnosis, the cost of subsequent management, and clinical outcome. Secondary measures included prognostic power, normal angiography rate, and rate of angiography not followed by revascularization. RESULTS: Mean diagnostic costs per patient were: strategy 1: 490 Pounds, 2: 409 Pounds, 3: 460 Pounds, 4: 1253 Pounds (P < 0.0001). Myocardial perfusion imaging users: 529 Pounds, non-users 667 Pounds (P = 0.006). Mean probability of the presence of coronary artery disease when the final clinical diagnosis was coronary artery disease present were, strategy 1: 0.85, 2: 0.82, 3: 0.97, 4: 1.0 (P < 0.0001), users 0.93, non-users 0.88 (P = 0.02), and when coronary artery disease was absent, 1: 0.26, 2: 0.22, 3: 0.16, 4: 0.0 (P < 0.0001), users 0.21, non-users 0.20 (P = ns). Total 2-year costs (coronary artery disease present/absent) were: strategy 1: 4453 Pounds/710 Pounds, 2: 3842 Pounds/478 Pounds, 3: 3768 Pounds/574 Pounds, 4: 5599 Pounds/1475 Pounds (P < 0.05/0.0001), users: 5563 Pounds/623 Pounds, non-users: 5428 Pounds/916 Pounds (P = ns/0.001). Prognostic power at diagnosis was higher (P < 0.0001) and normal coronary angiography rate lower (P = 0.07) in the scintigraphic centres and strategies. Numbers of soft and hard cardiac events over 2 years and final symptomatic status did not differ between strategy or centre. CONCLUSION: Investigative strategies using myocardial perfusion imaging are cheaper and equally effective when compared with strategies that do not use myocardial perfusion imaging, both for cost of diagnosis and for overall 2 year management costs. Two year patient outcome is the same.     

Serial evaluation of perfusion defects in patients with a first acute myocardial infarction referred for primary PTCA using intravenous myocardial contrast echocardiography.

AIMS: To investigate whether myocardial contrast echocardiography using Sonazoid could be used for the serial evaluation of the presence and extent of myocardial perfusion defects in patients with a first acute myocardial infarction treated with primary PTCA, and specifically, (1) to evaluate safety and efficacy of myocardial contrast echocardiography to detect TIMI flow grade 0--2, (2) to evaluate the success of reperfusion and (3) to predict left ventricular recovery after 4 weeks follow-up. METHODS AND RESULTS: Fifty-nine patients underwent serial myocardial contrast echocardiography, immediately before primary PTCA (MCE1), 1 h (MCE2) and 12--24 h after PTCA (MCE3). A perfusion defect was observed in 21 of 24 patients (88%) with anterior acute myocardial infarction. All but one had TIMI flow grade 0--2 prior to PTCA. Nine of 31 patients (29%) with inferior acute myocardial infarction showed a perfusion defect and all had TIMI flow grade 0-2 prior to PTCA. Restoration of TIMI flow grade 3 was achieved in 73% of the patients by primary PTCA. A reduction in size of the initial perfusion defect of at least one segment (16 segment model) or no defect vs persistent defect in patients with anterior acute myocardial infarction was associated with improved global left ventricular function at 4 weeks; mean global wall motion score index 1.29+/-0.21 vs 1.66+/-0.31 (P=0.009). Multiple regression analysis in patients with an anterior acute myocardial infarction revealed that the extent of the perfusion defect at MCE3 was a significant (P=0.0005) independent predictor for left ventricular recovery at 4 weeks follow-up. The only other independent predictor was TIMI flow grade 3 post PTCA (P=0.007). CONCLUSION: Intravenous myocardial contrast echocardiography immediately prior to primary PTCA seems safe and is capable of detecting the presence of a perfusion defect and its subsequent dynamic changes, particularly in patients with a first anterior acute myocardial infarction. A significant reduction in size of the initial perfusion defect using serial myocardial contrast echocardiography predicts functional recovery after 4 weeks and these findings underscore the potential diagnostic value of intravenous myocardial contrast echocardiography.     

The value of myocardial contrast echocardiography compared with SPECT in detecting myocardial perfusion abnormalities in patients with anterior acute myocardial infarction

BACKGROUND: Microvasculature damage after myocardial infarction (MI), known as "no-reflow" phenomenon, may occur in some patients with acute MI in spite of invasive treatment and opened infarct-related coronary artery. There are several non-invasive and invasive methods used for the coronary flow assessment at the tissue level. AIM: To compare the value of intravenous contrast echocardiography (MCE) in detecting myocardial perfusion defects in patients with acute MI with (99m)Tc MIBI SPECT study. METHODS: Sixteen patients (11 males, 5 females, mean age 55.4+/-10.2 years) underwent primary coronary angioplasty or facilitated angioplasty (with reduced dose of a fibrinolytic drug and glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor) (PCI) for acute anterior MI. TIMI grade flow, TIMI Myocardial Perfusion Grade (TMPG), corrected TIMI frame count (cTFC), wall motion score index (WMSI) and segmental perfusion by myocardial contrast echocardiography (MCE) were estimated in real time before and immediately after PCI. MCE was repeated on the third day after PCI. All patients underwent (99m)Tc MIBI SPECT study (SPECT) while at rest on the third day after PCI. The area at risk was defined as the number of segments with no perfusion before angioplasty. Reflow was defined as an increase in contrast score in the same segments after angioplasty. RESULTS: Baseline MCE showed 95 segments with perfusion defects. Immediately after PCI, 77 segments were found with perfusion defect; in 10 patients improvement of myocardial perfusion was observed whereas in 6 patients perfusion defect remained unchanged. On the third day further improvement was observed in 8 patients. The number of segments with perfusion defect decreased to 53. SPECT detected perfusion defect in 54 segments. The agreement between MCE and SPECT for detecting perfusion abnormality was 98% (kappa 0.94). CONCLUSIONS: MCE is a safe technique for detecting myocardial perfusion in patients with acute MI. MCE proves that both primary and facilitated angioplasty improve myocardial perfusion in two thirds of patients with acute MI. Serial MCE allows identification of patients with both early and late improvement of myocardial perfusion. There is a very strong correlation between MCE and SPECT in the assessment of perfusion defects.     

Analysis of myocardial perfusion or myocardial function for detection of regional myocardial abnormalities. An echocardiographic multicenter comparison study using myocardial contrast echocardiography and 2D echocardiography.

BACKGROUND: Echocardiography based myocardial perfusion imaging and regional wall motion analysis are used for evaluation of coronary artery disease and regional myocardial abnormalities. AIM: This study sought to compare myocardial contrast echocardiography (MCE) and 2D echocardiography with regard to interobserver variability and detection of regional myocardial abnormalities. METHODS: In 70 patients evenly distributed between three ejection fraction groups based on biplane cineventriculography ( > 55%, 35-55%, < 35%), unenhanced and contrast enhanced 2D echocardiography and myocardial contrast echocardiography (MCE; SonoVue; Bracco) were performed. Regional wall motion and myocardial perfusion were assessed referring to a 16 segment model. Interobserver agreement (IOA) among 2 readers was determined within each imaging modality. To define a standard of truth for the presence of segmental myocardial disease an independent expert-panel decision was obtained based on clinical data, ECG, coronary angiography and blinded information from the imaging modalities. RESULTS: Regional wall motion assessment was possible in 98.1% of segments using contrast enhanced 2D echocardiography and in 87.2% using unenhanced 2D echocardiography (p < 0.001), while perfusion assessment was possible in 90.1% of segments (p < 0.001). IOA on presence of any regional wall motion abnormality expressed as Kappa coefficient was 0.71 (95% CI 0.53-0.89) for contrast enhanced echocardiography and 0.37 (95% CI 0.14-0.59) for unenhanced echocardiography. IOA on presence of any perfusion abnormality was 0.53 (95% CI 0.34-0.73). For MCE there was high IOA for the apical segments (kappa = 0.57) and lower IOA for the basal segments (kappa=0.14), while no such gradient was found for the IOA on wall motion abnormalities. Mean accuracy to detect expert-panel defined myocardial abnormalities was 80.6% for unenhanced echocardiography, 85.0% for contrast enhanced 2D echocardiography and 80.6% for MCE. CONCLUSIONS: MCE is inferior to contrast enhanced 2D echocardiography with regard to visibility of all LV segments and appears slightly inferior with regards to IOA, while both are superior to unenhanced 2D echocardiography. The methods demonstrated high accuracy in detection of panel defined regional myocardial abnormalities.