Qualitative angiographic and quantitative myocardial perfusion assessment using fluorescent cardiac imaging during graded coronary artery bypass stenosis

  • Christian Detter
  • Detlef Russ
  • Jan Felix Kersten
  • Hermann Reichenspurner
  • Sabine Wipper
Original Paper


Intraoperative graft assessment in coronary artery bypass (CAB) grafting is important to avoid early graft failure. This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of fluorescent cardiac imaging (FCI) for intraoperative qualitative angiographic and quantitative myocardial perfusion assessment during graded CAB stenosis compared to coronary angiography (CA). After CAB grafting to the left anterior descending coronary artery, graded distal bypass stenoses were created in ten pigs by 25, 50, 75, and 100% flow reduction assessed by transit-time flow measurement (TTFM). Visual angiographic assessment was performed by FCI and CA during baseline and graded bypass stenoses. Altered myocardial perfusion was assessed by quantitative intraoperative fluorescence intensity (QIFI) derived from FCI and correlated to TTFM. Patent bypass grafts and graft occlusion were visualized successfully by FCI and CA, while discrimination between various graded bypass stenosis was possible in 73.3%. The degree of CAB stenosis was overestimated in 16.7% and underestimated in 10.0% by FCI compared to CA. Graded CAB stenosis reduced regional myocardial perfusion quantified by decreased QIFI value (p < 0.001). Mean QIFI value was 76.8 (95% CI 67.2–86.3) during baseline, 55.6 (95% CI 45.3–65.9) during 25% flow-reduction, 30.6 (95% CI 22.3–39.0) during 50% flow-reduction, 20.3 (95% CI 15.4–25.3) during 75% flow-reduction, and 0 during CAB occlusion (p < 0.001) with a significant correlation to TTFM (r = 0.955; p < 0.0001). Solely visual assessment of CAB quality using FCI is limited as compared to CA. Additional QIFI assessment identified graded CAB stenosis and occlusion with a significant correlation to TTFM.


Fluorescent cardiac imaging Coronary angiography Indocyanine green Intraoperative fluorescent imaging CABG Intraoperative quality control 



We acknowledge Christiane Pahrmann for her support in the animal laboratory and Harleen K Sandhu, MD, MPH for her support in editing the manuscript.


The present study was supported by the “Institut für Lasertechnologien in der Medizin und Messtechnik”, University Ulm, and the University Heart Center Hamburg, Germany.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. 1.
    Mack MJ (2008) Intraoperative coronary graft assessment. Curr Opin Cardiol 23:568–572CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Balacumaraswami L, Taggart DP (2007) Intraoperative imaging techniques to assess coronary artery bypass graft patency. Ann Thorac Surg 83:2251–2257CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hess CN, Lopes RD, Gibson CM, Hager R, Wojdyla DM, Englum BR et al (2014) Saphenous vein graft failure after coronary artery bypass surgery. Insights from PREVENT IV. Circulation 130:1445–1451CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Leacche M, Balaguer JM, Byrne JG (2009) Intraoperative grafts assessment. Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 21:207–212CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ward HB, Kelly RF, Weir EK (2009) Assessment of graft patency during coronary artery bypass graft surgery: mitigating the risk. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2:613–615CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Balacumaraswami L, Abu-Omar Y, Choudhary B, Pigott D, Taggart DP (2005) A comparison of transit-time flowmetry and intraoperative fluorescence imaging for assessing coronary artery bypass graft patency. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 130:315–320CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hol PK, Fosse E, Mork BE, Lundblad R, Rein KA, Lingaas PS et al (2001) Graft control by transit time flow measurement and intraoperative angiography in coronary artery bypass surgery. Heart Surg Forum 4:254–257PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Reuthebuch O, Häussler A, Genoni M, Tavakoli R, Odavic D, Kadner A et al (2004) Novadaq SPY: intraoperative quality assessment in off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting. Chest 125:418–424CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Taggart DP, Choudhary B, Anastasiadis K, Abu-Omar Y, Balacumaraswami L, Pigott DW (2003) Preliminary experience with a novel intraoperative fluorescence imaging technique to evaluate the patency of bypass grafts in total arterial revascularization. Ann Thorac Surg 75:870–873CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Desai ND, Miwa S, Kodama D, Cohen G, Christakis GT, Goldman BS et al (2005) Improving the quality of coronary bypass surgery with intraoperative angiography: validation of a new technique. J Am Coll Cardiol 46:1521–1525CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Desai ND, Miwa S, Kodama D, Koyama T, Cohen G, Pelletier MP et al (2006) A randomized comparison of intraoperative indocyanine green angiography and transit-time flow measurement to detect technical errors in coronary bypass grafts. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 132:585–594CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Detter C, Russ D, Iffland A, Wipper S, Schurr MO, Reichenspurner H et al (2002) Near-infrared fluorescence coronary angiography: a new noninvasive technology for intraoperative graft patency control. Heart Surg Forum 5:364–369PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Detter C, Wipper S, Russ D, Iffland A, Burdorf L, Thein E et al (2007) Fluorescent cardiac imaging: a novel intraoperative method for quantitative assessment of myocardial perfusion during graded coronary artery stenosis. Circulation 116:1007–1014CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wipper S, Reiter B, Russ D, Hahnel F, Kersten JF, Kölbel T et al (2016) Distinction of non-ischemia inducing versus ischemia inducing coronary stenosis by fluorescent cardiac imaging. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 32:363–371CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cherrick GR, Stein SW, Leevy CM, Davidson CS (1960) Indocyanine green: observations on its physical properties, plasma decay, and hepatic extraction. J Clin Invest 39:592–600CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hope-Ross M, Yannuzzi LA, Gragoudas ES, Guyer DR, Slakter JS, Sorenson JA et al (1994) Adverse reactions due to indocyanine green. Ophthalmology 101:529–533CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gould KL, Johnson NP, Bateman TM, Beanlands RS, Bengel FM, Bober R et al (2013) Anatomic versus physiologic assessment of coronary artery disease. Role of coronary flow reserve, fractional flow reserve, and positron emission tomography imaging in revascularization decision-making. J Am Coll Cardiol 62:1639–1653CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    White CW, Wright CB, Doty DB, Hiratza LF, Eastham CL, Harrison DG et al (1984) Does visual interpretation of the coronary arteriogram predict the physiologic importance of a coronary stenosis? N Engl J Med 310:819–824CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Folland ED, Vogel RA, Hartigan P, Bates ER, Beauman GJ, Fortin T et al (1994) Relation between coronary artery stenosis assessed by visual, caliper, and computer methods and exercise capacity in patients with single-vessel coronary artery disease. The veterans affairs ACME investigators. Circulation 89:2005–2014CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Pijls NH, De Bruyne B, Peels K, Van Der Voort PH, Bonnier HJ, Bartunek et al (1996) Measurement of fractional flow reserve to assess the functional severity of coronary-artery stenoses. N Engl J Med 334:1703–1708CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Pijls NH, Fearon WF, Tonino PA, Siebert U, Ikeno F, Bornschein B et al (2010) Fractional flow reserve versus angiography for guiding percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease: 2-year follow-up of the FAME (Fractional Flow Reserve Versus Angiography for Multivessel Evaluation) study. J Am Coll Cardiol 56:177–184CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    De Bruyne B, Fearon WF, Pijls NH, Barbato E, Tonino P, Piroth Z et al (2014) Fractional flow reserve-guided PCI for stable coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med 371:1208–1217CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Pellicano M, De Bruyne B, Toth GG, Casselman F, Wijns W, Barbato E (2017) Fractional flow reserve to guide and to assess coronary artery bypass grafting. Eur Heart J 38:1959–1968Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mansour S, El Hammiri A, Matteau A, Potter B, Noiseux N, Louis-Mathieu Stevens LM et al (2017) Appropriateness of coronary artery bypass grafting based on fractional flow reserve lesions assessment. J Am Coll Cardiol 69:1061CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ferguson TB Jr, Chen C, Babb JD, Efird JT, Daggubati R, Cahill JM (2013) Fractional flow reserve-guided coronary artery bypass grafting: can intraoperative physiologic imaging guide decision making? J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 146:824–835CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christian Detter
    • 1
  • Detlef Russ
    • 2
  • Jan Felix Kersten
    • 3
  • Hermann Reichenspurner
    • 1
  • Sabine Wipper
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Cardiovascular SurgeryUniversity Heart Center HamburgHamburgGermany
  2. 2.Institut für Lasertechnologien in der Medizin und MesstechnikUniversity UlmUlmGermany
  3. 3.Department of Medical Biometry and EpidemiologyUniversity Hospital EppendorfHamburgGermany

Personalised recommendations