Adenosine myocardial contrast echo in intermediate severity coronary stenoses: a prospective two-center study

  • Christian FirschkeEmail author
  • Peter Andrássy
  • Andre Z. Linka
  • Raymonde Busch
  • Stefan Martinoff
Original Paper



We sought to evaluate the role of adenosine myocardial contrast echocardiography (MCE) for the determination of functional relevance of coronary stenoses with intermediate angiographic severity and compared the results to single photon imaging (SPECT). We hypothezised that sole assessment of myocardial blood volume changes during adenosine on MCE would indicate functional stensosis relevance when accompanied by increased myocardial oxygen consumption (MVO2).


Fifty-seven patients with ≥1 coronary stenosis underwent adenosine MCE (ultraharmonic imaging) and exercise SPECT. On MCE, myocardial blood volume was assessed and constant or increased myocardial opacification during adenosine coupled with increased MVO2 was defined as normal and decreased opacification as abnormal.


Rate–pressure product significantly increased during adenosine in all patients due to reflex tachycardia following mild hypotension, indicative of increased MVO2. Concordance between MCE and SPECT for the detection of reversible myocardial perfusion defects was 89% (κ = 0.83). Comparison of regions between rest and during adenosine as opposed to comparison to remote regions of the same stage was important for accurate assessment because concordance betweenn MCE and SPECT was less on separate assessment at rest (73%, κ = 0.40) compared to stress (91%, κ = 0.81, P < 0.05) mainly due to territories scored normal on SPECT and abnormal on MCE.


Assessment of myocardial blood volume changes during adenosine using MCE can be used for the determination of the functional relevance of coronary stenoses of intermediate angiographic severity if MVO2 is increased during adenosine.


Coronary disease Contrast media Echocardiography 



Dr. Andrássy was the recipient of a fellowship training grant from the German Cardiac Society. The work was supported by a clinical research grant from Technische Universität München (KKF 87/03). We are indebted to Kevin Wei, M.D. for thoughtful critique of the manuscript.


  1. 1.
    Hachamovitch R, Berman DS, Shaw LJ et al (1998) Incremental prognostic value of myocardial perfusion single photon emission computed tomography for the prediction of cardiac death: differential stratification for risk of cardiac death and myocardial infarction [published erratum appears in Circulation (1998) 98(2):190]. Circulation 97:535–543Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Vanzetto G, Ormezzano O, Fagret D, Comet M, Denis B, Machecourt J (1999) Long-term additive prognostic value of thallium-201 myocardial perfusion imaging over clinical and exercise stress test in low to intermediate risk patients: study in 1137 patients with 6-year follow-up. Circulation 100:1521–1527PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Marcus ML, Skorton DJ, Johnson MR, Collins SM, Harrison DG, Kerber RE (1988) Visual estimates of percent diameter coronary stenosis: “a battered gold standard”. J Am Coll Cardiol 11:882–885PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Topol EJ, Nissen SE (1995) Our preoccupation with coronary luminology. The dissociation between clinical and angiographic findings in ischemic heart disease [see comments]. Circulation 92:2333–2342PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Heller LI, Cates C, Popma J, et al. (1997) Intracoronary Doppler assessment of moderate coronary artery disease: comparison with 201Tl imaging and coronary angiography. FACTS Study Group. Circulation 96:484–490PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Vogel RA (1988) Assessing stenosis significance by coronary arteriography: are the best variables good enough? J Am Coll Cardiol 12:692–693PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ryan TJ, Bauman WB, Kennedy JW et al (1993) Guidelines for percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. A report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Task Force on assessment of diagnostic and therapeutic cardiovascular procedures (Committee on Percutaneous Transluminal Coronary Angioplasty). Circulation 88:2987–3007Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Uren NG, Melin JA, De Bruyne B, Wijns W, Baudhuin T, Camici PG (1994) Relation between myocardial blood flow and the severity of coronary-artery stenosis. N Engl J Med 330:1782–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jayaweera AR, Wei K, Coggins M, Bin JP, Goodman C, Kaul S (1999) Role of capillaries in determining CBF reserve: new insights using myocardial contrast echocardiography. Am J Physiol 277:H2363–H2372PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kaul S, Senior R, Dittrich H, Raval U, Khattar R, Lahiri A (1997) Detection of coronary artery disease with myocardial contrast echocardiography: comparison with 99m Tc-sestamibi single-photon emission computed tomography. Circulation 96:785–792PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Heinle SK, Noblin J, Goree-Best P et al (2000) Assessment of myocardial perfusion by harmonic power Doppler imaging at rest and during adenosine stress: comparison with (99m) Tc-sestamibi SPECT imaging. Circulation 102:55–60PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kuersten B, Murthy TH, Li P et al. (2001) Ultraharmonic myocardial contrast imaging: in vivo experimental and clinical data from a novel technique. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 14:910–916PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wei K, Jayaweera AR, Firoozan S, Linka A, Skyba DM, Kaul S (1998) Quantification of myocardial blood flow with ultrasound-induced destruction of microbubbles administered as a constant venous infusion. Circulation 97:473–483PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cerqueira MD, Verani MS, Schwaiger M, Heo J, Iskandrian AS (1994) Safety profile of adenosine stress perfusion imaging: results from the Adenoscan Multicenter Trial Registry. J Am Coll Cardiol 23:384–389PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Le E, Jing-Pin B, Coggins MP, Wei K, Kaul S (2002) Relation between myocardial oxygen consumption and myocardial blood volume: a study using myocardial contrast echocardiography. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 15:857–863PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Fleiss R, Landis RJ, Koch GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorial data. Biometrics 33:159–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Senior R, Lepper W, Pasquet A, Chung G, Hoffmann R, Vanoverschelde JL, Cerqueira M, Kaul S (2004) Myocardial perfusion assessment in patients with medium probability of coronary artery disease and no prior myocardial infarction: comparison of myocardial contrast echocardiography with 99m Tc single-photon emission computed tomography. Am Heart J 147(6):1100–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jayaweera AR, Edwards N, Glasheen WP, Villanueva FS, Abbot RD, Kaul S (1994) In-vivo myocardial kinetics of air-filled albumin microbubbles during myocardial contrast echocardiography: comparison with radiolabeled red blood cell. Circ Res 74:1157–1165PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wei K, Skyba DM, Firschke C, Jayaweera AR, Lindner JR, Kaul S (1997) Interactions between microbubbles and ultrasound: in vitro and in vivo observations. J Am Coll Cardiol 29:1081–1088PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Porter TR, Xie F, Silver M, Kricsfeld D, Oleary E (2001) Real-time perfusion imaging with low mechanical index pulse inversion Doppler imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol 37:748–753PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Korosoglou G, DaSilva K, Labadze N, Dubart A, Hansen A, Rosenberg M, Zehelein J, Kuecherer H (2004) Real-time myocardial contrast echocardiography for pharmacologic stress testing: is quantitative estimation of myocardial blood flow reserve necessary? J Am Soc Echocardiogr 17:1–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Wei K, Ragosta M, Thorpe J, Coggins M, Moos S, Kaul S (2001) Noninvasive quantification of coronary blood flow reserve in humans using myocardial contrast echocardiography. Circulation 103:2560–2565PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Crystal GJ, Downey HF, Bashour F (1981) Small vessel and total coronary blood volume during intracoronary adenosine. Am J Physiol 41:H194–H201Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Bin J-P, Pelberg RA, Wei K, Le E, Goodman NC, Kaul S (2002) Dobutamine versus dipyridamole for inducing reversible perfusion defects in chronic multivessel coronary artery stenosis. J Am Coll Cardiol 40:167–174PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Masugata H, Lafitte S, Peters B, Strachan GM, DeMaria AN (2001) Comparison of real-time and intermittent triggered myocardial contrast echocardiography for quantification of coronary stenosis severity and transmural perfusion gradient. Circulation 104:1550–1556PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Andrássy P, Zielinska M, Busch R, Schömig A, Firschke C (2002) Correlation between myocardial blood volume and the amount of viable myocardium in the infarct zone after mechanical reperfusion of acute myocardial infarction. Heart 87:350–355PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christian Firschke
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Peter Andrássy
    • 2
  • Andre Z. Linka
    • 4
  • Raymonde Busch
    • 3
  • Stefan Martinoff
    • 2
  1. 1.Associate Professor of Medicine ReichertshausenGermany
  2. 2.Deutsches HerzzentrumTechnische Universität MünchenMünchenGermany
  3. 3.Institut für Medizinische Statistik und EpidemiologieTechnische Universität MünchenMünchenGermany
  4. 4.Abteilung für Kardiologie, KantonsspitalUniversität BaselBaselSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations