Contrast echocardiography in acute myocardial ischemia. II. The effect of site of injection of contrast agent on the estimation of area at risk for necrosis after coronary occlusion

Sanjiv Kaul, Linda Gillam, Arthur E. Weyman

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

41 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Myocardial contrast echocardiography has been shown to accurately assess the area at risk for necrosis after acute coronary occlusion in the experimental model. The area at risk as determined by this method, however, has been defined in different ways depending on the model used. Some investigators have injected the contrast agent proximal to the site of coronary occlusion (left main coronary artery or aorta) and defined the area at risk as the segment of myocardium not showing a contrast effect (negative risk area). Others have injected the contrast agent directly into the occluded vessel and have defined the area at risk as that showing contrast enhancement (positive risk area). To evaluate whether the areas at risk determined by these two techniques are identical, six open chest dogs were studied using both methods. The area at risk was slightly but significantly larger when the contrast agent was injected into the occluded vessel than when it was injected proximally into the left main coronary artery (4.98 ± 1.69 versus 3.97 ± 1.27 cm2, p < 0.01). It is concluded that the site of injection of the contrast agent significantly influences the determination of area at risk. Therefore, data obtained by the two techniques should not be used interchangeably, and in a given study the area at risk should be measured consistently using one technique.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)825-830
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of the American College of Cardiology
Volume6
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 1985
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Coronary Occlusion
Contrast Media
Myocardial Ischemia
Echocardiography
Necrosis
Injections
Coronary Vessels
Aorta
Myocardium
Theoretical Models
Thorax
Research Personnel
Dogs

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

@article{6d61e4b7dcbd4a719dde8f61ffc50e13,
title = "Contrast echocardiography in acute myocardial ischemia. II. The effect of site of injection of contrast agent on the estimation of area at risk for necrosis after coronary occlusion",
abstract = "Myocardial contrast echocardiography has been shown to accurately assess the area at risk for necrosis after acute coronary occlusion in the experimental model. The area at risk as determined by this method, however, has been defined in different ways depending on the model used. Some investigators have injected the contrast agent proximal to the site of coronary occlusion (left main coronary artery or aorta) and defined the area at risk as the segment of myocardium not showing a contrast effect (negative risk area). Others have injected the contrast agent directly into the occluded vessel and have defined the area at risk as that showing contrast enhancement (positive risk area). To evaluate whether the areas at risk determined by these two techniques are identical, six open chest dogs were studied using both methods. The area at risk was slightly but significantly larger when the contrast agent was injected into the occluded vessel than when it was injected proximally into the left main coronary artery (4.98 ± 1.69 versus 3.97 ± 1.27 cm2, p < 0.01). It is concluded that the site of injection of the contrast agent significantly influences the determination of area at risk. Therefore, data obtained by the two techniques should not be used interchangeably, and in a given study the area at risk should be measured consistently using one technique.",
author = "Sanjiv Kaul and Linda Gillam and Weyman, {Arthur E.}",
year = "1985",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/S0735-1097(85)80490-3",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "6",
pages = "825--830",
journal = "Journal of the American College of Cardiology",
issn = "0735-1097",
publisher = "Elsevier USA",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Contrast echocardiography in acute myocardial ischemia. II. The effect of site of injection of contrast agent on the estimation of area at risk for necrosis after coronary occlusion

AU - Kaul, Sanjiv

AU - Gillam, Linda

AU - Weyman, Arthur E.

PY - 1985/1/1

Y1 - 1985/1/1

N2 - Myocardial contrast echocardiography has been shown to accurately assess the area at risk for necrosis after acute coronary occlusion in the experimental model. The area at risk as determined by this method, however, has been defined in different ways depending on the model used. Some investigators have injected the contrast agent proximal to the site of coronary occlusion (left main coronary artery or aorta) and defined the area at risk as the segment of myocardium not showing a contrast effect (negative risk area). Others have injected the contrast agent directly into the occluded vessel and have defined the area at risk as that showing contrast enhancement (positive risk area). To evaluate whether the areas at risk determined by these two techniques are identical, six open chest dogs were studied using both methods. The area at risk was slightly but significantly larger when the contrast agent was injected into the occluded vessel than when it was injected proximally into the left main coronary artery (4.98 ± 1.69 versus 3.97 ± 1.27 cm2, p < 0.01). It is concluded that the site of injection of the contrast agent significantly influences the determination of area at risk. Therefore, data obtained by the two techniques should not be used interchangeably, and in a given study the area at risk should be measured consistently using one technique.

AB - Myocardial contrast echocardiography has been shown to accurately assess the area at risk for necrosis after acute coronary occlusion in the experimental model. The area at risk as determined by this method, however, has been defined in different ways depending on the model used. Some investigators have injected the contrast agent proximal to the site of coronary occlusion (left main coronary artery or aorta) and defined the area at risk as the segment of myocardium not showing a contrast effect (negative risk area). Others have injected the contrast agent directly into the occluded vessel and have defined the area at risk as that showing contrast enhancement (positive risk area). To evaluate whether the areas at risk determined by these two techniques are identical, six open chest dogs were studied using both methods. The area at risk was slightly but significantly larger when the contrast agent was injected into the occluded vessel than when it was injected proximally into the left main coronary artery (4.98 ± 1.69 versus 3.97 ± 1.27 cm2, p < 0.01). It is concluded that the site of injection of the contrast agent significantly influences the determination of area at risk. Therefore, data obtained by the two techniques should not be used interchangeably, and in a given study the area at risk should be measured consistently using one technique.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0022388236&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0022388236&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/S0735-1097(85)80490-3

DO - 10.1016/S0735-1097(85)80490-3

M3 - Article

VL - 6

SP - 825

EP - 830

JO - Journal of the American College of Cardiology

JF - Journal of the American College of Cardiology

SN - 0735-1097

IS - 4

ER -