Aim: To test whether quantitative stress echocardiography using contrast-based myocardial blood flow (MBF, ml.min−1.g−1) measurements can detect coronary artery disease in humans.
Methods: 48 patients eligible for pharmacological stress testing by myocardial contrast echocardiography (MCE) and willing to undergo subsequent coronary angiography were prospectively enrolled in the study. Baseline and adenosine-induced (140 μg.kg−1.min−1) hyperaemic MBF was analysed according to a three-coronary-artery-territory model. Vascular territories were categorised into three groups with increasing stenosis severity defined as percentage diameter reduction by quantitative coronary angiography.
Results: Myocardial blood flow reserve (MBFR)—that is, the ratio of hyperaemic to baseline MBF, was obtained in 128 (89%) territories. Mean (SD) baseline MBF was 1.073 (0.395) ml.min−1.g−1 and did not differ between territories supplied by coronary arteries with mild (<50% stenosis), moderate (50%–74% stenosis) or severe (⩾75% stenosis) disease. Mean (SD) hyperaemic MBF and MBFR were 2.509 (1.078) ml.min−1.g−1 and 2.54 (1.03), respectively, and decreased linearly (r2 = 0.21 and r2 = 0.39) with stenosis severity. ROC analysis revealed that a territorial MBFR <1.94 detected ⩾50% stenosis with 89% sensitivity and 92% specificity.
Conclusion: Quantitative stress testing based on MBF measurements derived from contrast echocardiography is a new method for the non-invasive and reliable assessment of coronary artery disease in humans.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Funding: This work was supported by grants from the Swiss National Science Foundation (No 32-58945.99, to CS) and the Swiss Heart Foundation. The ultrasound equipment Acuson Sequoia was provided by Siemens Medical Solutions, Switzerland.
Competing interests: None.
Ethics approval: The study protocol was approved by the ethics committee of the Kanton of Bern, Switzerland, and written informed consent was obtained from all patients.