Assessing Myocardial Viability and Infarct Transmurality With Left Ventricular Electromechanical Mapping in Patients With Stable Coronary Artery Disease: Validation by Delayed-Enhancement Magnetic Resonance Imaging

E. Perin, G. Silva, R. Sarmento-Leite, A. Sousa, M. Howell, R. Muthupillai, B. Lambert, W. Vaughn, S. Flamm
{"title":"Assessing Myocardial Viability and Infarct Transmurality With Left Ventricular Electromechanical Mapping in Patients With Stable Coronary Artery Disease: Validation by Delayed-Enhancement Magnetic Resonance Imaging","authors":"E. Perin, G. Silva, R. Sarmento-Leite, A. Sousa, M. Howell, R. Muthupillai, B. Lambert, W. Vaughn, S. Flamm","doi":"10.1161/01.CIR.0000026394.01888.18","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background—This study was designed to define myocardial viability and establish practical cut-off values for differentiating normal myocardial tissue from subendocardial and transmural scar tissue by using electromechanical mapping (EMM). We validated our results by delayed-enhancement cardiac MRI (DE-MRI). Methods and Results—We prospectively studied 15 ambulatory patients with stable coronary disease who were candidates for cardiac catheterization. Within 48 hours of EMM, DE-MRI was performed. Using EMM software, we created a bull’s eye precisely matched to that generated by DE-MRI. Segment by segment, we compared the MRI results to the corresponding unipolar voltage value for that same segment in the EMM bull’s eye. Of 300 total segments, 275 were compared. The segments were divided into normal (n=211), subendocardial scar (n=49), and transmural scar (n=15). We found that subendocardial (6.8±2.9 mV) and transmural (4.6±1.9 mV) scar segments had significantly less unipolar voltage than normal (11.6±4.5 mV) segments (P <0.05 for each comparison). When normal myocardium was compared with myocardium with subendocardial scar, the threshold for differentiating between the two areas was 7.9 mV (sensitivity, 80%; specificity, 80%). Comparison of normal tissue to transmural scar yielded a threshold of 6.9 mV (sensitivity, 93%; specificity, 88%). Conclusions—Our results demonstrate that normal myocardium can be accurately distinguished from myocardium with subendocardial or transmural infarcts on the basis of unipolar voltage values obtained through EMM. This is the first study to validate these results by using cardiac DE-MRI in humans.","PeriodicalId":10194,"journal":{"name":"Circulation: Journal of the American Heart Association","volume":"106 1","pages":"957-961"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2002-08-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"138","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Circulation: Journal of the American Heart Association","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1161/01.CIR.0000026394.01888.18","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 138

Abstract

Background—This study was designed to define myocardial viability and establish practical cut-off values for differentiating normal myocardial tissue from subendocardial and transmural scar tissue by using electromechanical mapping (EMM). We validated our results by delayed-enhancement cardiac MRI (DE-MRI). Methods and Results—We prospectively studied 15 ambulatory patients with stable coronary disease who were candidates for cardiac catheterization. Within 48 hours of EMM, DE-MRI was performed. Using EMM software, we created a bull’s eye precisely matched to that generated by DE-MRI. Segment by segment, we compared the MRI results to the corresponding unipolar voltage value for that same segment in the EMM bull’s eye. Of 300 total segments, 275 were compared. The segments were divided into normal (n=211), subendocardial scar (n=49), and transmural scar (n=15). We found that subendocardial (6.8±2.9 mV) and transmural (4.6±1.9 mV) scar segments had significantly less unipolar voltage than normal (11.6±4.5 mV) segments (P <0.05 for each comparison). When normal myocardium was compared with myocardium with subendocardial scar, the threshold for differentiating between the two areas was 7.9 mV (sensitivity, 80%; specificity, 80%). Comparison of normal tissue to transmural scar yielded a threshold of 6.9 mV (sensitivity, 93%; specificity, 88%). Conclusions—Our results demonstrate that normal myocardium can be accurately distinguished from myocardium with subendocardial or transmural infarcts on the basis of unipolar voltage values obtained through EMM. This is the first study to validate these results by using cardiac DE-MRI in humans.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
用左心室机电标测评估稳定冠状动脉疾病患者心肌活力和梗死跨壁性:延迟增强磁共振成像验证
本研究的目的是定义心肌活力,并建立实用的临界值,以区分正常心肌组织与心内膜下和跨壁疤痕组织。我们通过延迟增强心脏MRI (DE-MRI)验证了我们的结果。方法与结果:我们前瞻性研究了15例稳定的冠心病患者,这些患者适合心导管置入术。EMM后48小时内进行DE-MRI检查。使用EMM软件,我们创建了一个与DE-MRI生成的靶心精确匹配的靶心。一段一段地,我们将MRI结果与EMM靶眼中同一段相应的单极电压值进行比较。在总共300个片段中,有275个片段进行了比较。分为正常节段(211例)、心内膜下瘢痕(49例)和跨壁瘢痕(15例)。我们发现心内膜下(6.8±2.9 mV)和跨壁(4.6±1.9 mV)疤痕段的单极电压明显低于正常(11.6±4.5 mV)疤痕段(P <0.05)。当将正常心肌与心内膜下瘢痕心肌进行比较时,区分这两个区域的阈值为7.9 mV(敏感性,80%;特异性,80%)。正常组织与跨壁瘢痕比较的阈值为6.9 mV(敏感性93%;特异性,88%)。结论:我们的研究结果表明,通过EMM获得的单极电压值可以准确地区分正常心肌与心内膜下或跨壁梗死心肌。这是第一个通过在人体中使用心脏DE-MRI来验证这些结果的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Abstracts 4th Scientific Forum on Quality of Care and Outcomes Research in Cardiovascular Disease and Stroke Heat Shock Protein 72 Enhances Manganese Superoxide Dismutase Activity During Myocardial Ischemia-Reperfusion Injury, Associated With Mitochondrial Protection and Apoptosis Reduction Left Ventricular Reverse Remodeling After Surgical Therapy for Aortic Stenosis: Correlation to Renin-Angiotensin System Gene Expression Circulatory Assistance With a Permanent Implantable IABP: Initial Human Experience Keratinocyte Growth Factor Enhances Post-Pneumonectomy Lung Growth by Alveolar Proliferation
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1