Myocardial Viability

  • Luc Piérard
  • Eugenio Picano
Chapter

Viability information is like a moon in the sky of prognosis: in the daytime of a preserved global left ventricular function (ejection fraction >35%) the sun shines, and the moon – even if present in the sky – gives no additional prognostic light. The prognosis is linked to the clouds of ischemia, which obscure the sun of preserved resting function. In these good ventricles, with ejection fraction greater than 35%, the documentation of ischemia should dictate a revascularization oriented by the results of physiological testing. In the prognostic night light of a reduced left ventricular function (ejection fraction <35%), the adverse prognostic effects of ischemia are magnified and ischemia, per se, warrants revascularization. For any given level of inducible ischemia, the prognosis worsens with the worsening of the left ventricular function. The documentation of a large amount of viable myocardium reduces the risk of revascularization and viability-oriented revascularization determines a survival advantage in comparison to medically treated patients. It is important, however, that the “viability moonlight” can direct the cardiologist only when a “full moon” is present, i.e., a considerable amount of viable myocardium. Similar to ischemia, viability response should also be titrated. Viability is not a binary, dichotomous response, but it is a continuous response that should be stratified in different shades of gray. The prognostic protection conferred by viability is only detected when it exceeds a critical threshold of at least four segments or 20% of the total left ventricle. The beneficial impact of viability on survival is more pronounced in revascularized patients.

Keywords

Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Myocardial Viability Stress Echocardiography Dobutamine Stress Echocardiography Stun Myocardium 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Heyndrickx GR, Millard RW, McRitchie RJ, et al (1975) Regional myocardial functional and electrophysiological alterations after brief coronary artery occlusion in conscious dogs. J Clin Invest 56:978–985PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Braunwald E, Kloner RA (1982) The stunned myocardium: prolonged, postischemic ventricular dysfunction. Circulation 66:1146–1149PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rahimtoola SH (1985) A perspective on the three large multivessel randomized clinical trials of coronary bypass surgery for chronic stable angina. Circulation 72(Suppl V): V123–V135PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Braunwald E, Rutherford JD (1986) Reversible ischemic left ventricular dysfunction: evidence for “ hibernating myocardium”. J Am Coll Cardiol 56:978–985Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rahimtoola SH (1989) The hibernating myocardium. Am Heart J 117:211–220PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Flameng W, Suy R, Schwartz F et al (1981) Ultrastructural correlates of left ventricular contraction abnormalities in patients with chronic ischemic heart disease: determinants of reversible segmental asynergy post-revascularization surgery. Am Heart J 102:846–857PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Torres MA, Picano E, Parodi G, et al (1997) Residual coronary reserve identifies segmental viability in patients with wall motion abnormalities. J Am Coll Cardiol 30:65–70PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gregg DE (1963) Effect of coronary perfusion pressure or coronary flow on oxygen usage of the myocardium. Circ Res 13:497–500PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Salisbury P F, Cross CE, Rieben PA (1960) Influence of coronary artery pressure upon myo-cardial elasticity. Circ Res 8:794–800PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Stahl LD, Aversano TR, Becker LC (1986) Selective enhancement of function of stunned myocardium by increased flow. Circulation 74:843–851PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bonow RO (2002) Myocardial viability and prognosis in patients with ischemic left ventricular dysfunction. J Am Coll Cardiol 39:1159–1162PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Wagner A, Mahrholdt H, Holly TA, et al (2003) Contrast-enhanced MRI and routine single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) perfusion imaging for detection of suben-docardial myocardial infarcts: an imaging study. Lancet 361:374–379PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Faletra F, Crivellaro W, Pirelli S, et al (1995) Value of transthoracic two-dimensional echocar-diography in predicting viability in patients with healed Q-wave anterior wall myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol 76:1002–1006PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cwajg JM, Cwajg E, Nagueh SF, et al (2000) End-diastolic wall thickness as a predictor of recovery of function in myocardial hibernation: relation to rest-redistribution Tl-201 tomography and dobutamine stress echocardiography. J Am Coll Cardiol 35:1152–1161PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sabia PJ, Powers ER, Ragosta M, et al (1992) An association between collateral blood flow and myocardial viability in patients with recent myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 327:1825–1831PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ragosta M, Camarano G, Kaul S, et al (1994) Microvascular integrity indicates myocellular viability in patients with recent myocardial infarction. New insights using myocardial contrast echocardiography. Circulation 89:2562–2569Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ito H, Iwakura K, Oh H, et al (1995) Temporal changes in myocardial perfusion patterns in patients with reperfused anterior wall myocardial infarction. Their relation to myocardial viability. Circulation 91:656–662Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bolognese L, Antoniucci D, Rovai D, et al (1996) Myocardial contrast echocardiography versus dobutamine echocardiography for predicting functional recovery after acute myocardial infarction treated with primary coronary angioplasty. J Am Coll Cardiol 28:1677–1683PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    de Filippi CR, Willett DL, Irani WN, et al (1995) Comparison of myocardial contrast echocar-diography and low-dose dobutamine stress echocardiography in predicting recovery of left ventricular function after coronary revascularization in chronic ischemic heart disease. Circulation 92:2863–2868Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Meza MF, Ramee S, Collins T, et al (1997) Knowledge of perfusion and contractile reserve improves the predictive value of recovery of regional myocardial function postrevasculariza-tion: a study using the combination of myocardial contrast echocardiography and dobutamine echocardiography. Circulation 96:3459–3465PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Balcells E, Powers ER, Lepper W, et al (2003) Detection of myocardial viability by contrast echocardiography in acute infarction predicts recovery of resting function and contractile reserve. J Am Coll Cardiol 41:827–833PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Milunski MR, Mohr GA, Perez JE, et al (1989) Ultrasonic tissue characterization with integrated backscatter. Acute myocardial ischemia, reperfusion, and stunned myocardium in patients. Circulation 80:491–503Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Marini C, Picano E, Varga A, et al (1996) Cyclic variation in myocardial gray level as a marker of viability in man. A videodensitometric study. Eur Heart J 17:472–479Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Thibault H, Derumeaux G (2008) Assessment of myocardial ischemia and viability using tissue Doppler and deformation imaging: the lessons from the experimental studies. Arch Cardiovasc Dis 101:61–68PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Zhang Y, Chan AK, Yu CM, et al (2005) Strain rate imaging differentiates transmural from non-transmural myocardial infarction: a validation study using delayed-enhancement magnetic resonance imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol 46:864–871PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Becker M, Lenzen A, Ocklenburg C, et al (2008) Myocardial deformation imaging based on ultrasonic pixel tracking to identify reversible myocardial dysfunction. J Am Coll Cardiol 51:1473–1481PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Dyke SH, Cohn PF, Gorlin R, et al (1974) Detection of residual myocardial function in coronary artery disease using post-extra systolic potentiation. Circulation 50:694–699PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Horn HR, Teichholz LE, Cohn P F, et al (1974) Augmentation of left ventricular contraction pattern in coronary artery disease by an inotropic catecholamine. The epinephrine ventriculo-gram. Circulation 49:1063–1071Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Dyke SH, Urschel C W, Sonnenblick EH, et al (1975) Detection of latent function in acutely ischemic myocardium in the dog: comparison of pharmacologic inotropic stimulation and postextrasystolic potentiation. Circ Res 36:490–497PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Pierard LA, De Landsheere CM, Berthe C, et al (1990) Identification of viable myocardium by echocardiography during dobutamine infusion in patients with myocardial infarction after thrombo-lytic therapy: comparison with positron emission tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 15:1021–1031PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Smart SC, Sawada S, Ryan T, et al (1993) Low-dose dobutamine echocardiography detects reversible dysfunction after thrombolytic therapy of acute myocardial infarction. Circulation 88:405–415PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Watada H, Ito H, Oh H, et al (1994) Dobutamine stress echocardiography predicts reversible dysfunction and quantitates the extent of irreversibly damaged myocardium after reperfusion of anterior myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol 24:624–630PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Poli A, Previtali M, Lanzarini L, et al (1996) Comparison of dobutamine stress echocardiog-raphy with dipyridamole stress echocardiography for detection of viable myocardium after myocardial infarction treated with thrombolysis. Heart 75:240–246PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Barilla F, Gheorghiade K P, Alam M, et al (1993) Low-dose dobutamine in patients with acute myocardial infarction identifies viable but not contractile myocardium and predicts the magnitude of improvement in wall motion abnormalities in response to coronary revasculariza-tion. Am Heart J 51:1312–1316Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Zaglavara T, Haaverstad R, Cumberledge B, et al (2002) Dobutamine stress echocardiography for the detection of myocardial viability in patients with left ventricular dysfunction taking beta blockers: accuracy and optimal dose. Heart 87:329–335PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Cigarroa CG, deFilippi CR, Brickner ME, et al (1993) Dobutamine stress echocardiogra-phy identifies hibernating myocardium and predicts recovery of left ventricular function after coronary revascularization. Circulation 88:430–436PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    La Canna G, Alfieri O, Giubbini R, et al (1994) Echocardiography during infusion of dob-utamine for identification of reversibly dysfunction in patients with chronic coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol 23:617–626PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Afridi I, Kleiman NS, Raizner AE, et al (1995) Dobutamine echocardiography in myocardial hibernation. Optimal dose and accuracy in predicting recovery of ventricular function after coronary angioplasty. Circulation 91:663–670Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Arnese M, Cornel JH, Salustri A, et al (1995) Prediction of improvement of regional left ventricular function after surgical revascularization. A comparison of low-dose dobutamine echocardiography with 201Tl single-photon emission computed tomography. Circulation 91:2748–2752PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Perrone-Filardi P, Pace L, Prastaro M, et al (1995) Dobutamine echocardiography predicts improvement of hypoperfused dysfunctional myocardium after revascularization in patients with coronary artery disease. Circulation 91:2556–2565PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Haque T, Furukawa T, Takahashi M, et al (1995) Identification of hibernating myocardium by dobutamine stress echocardiography: comparison with thallium-201 reinjection imaging. Am Heart J 130:553–563PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Bax JJ, Wijns W, Cornel JH, et al (1997) Accuracy of currently available techniques for prediction of functional recovery after revascularization in patients with left ventricular dysfunction due to chronic coronary artery disease: comparison of pooled data. J Am Coll Cardiol 30:1451–1460PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Charney R, Schwinger ME, Chun J, et al (1994) Dobutamine echocardiography and resting redistribution thallium-201 scintigraphy predicts recovery of hibernating myocardium after coronary revascularization. Am Heart J 128:864–869PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Marzullo P, Parodi O, Reisenhofer B, et al (1993) Value of rest thallium-201/technetium-99m sestamibi scans and dobutamine echocardiography for detecting myocardial viability. Am J Cardiol 71:166–172PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Perrone-Filardi P, Pace L, Prastaro M, et al (1996) Assessment of myocardial viability in patients with chronic coronary artery disease. Rest-4-hour-24-hour 201Tl tomography versus dobutamine echocardiography. Circulation 94:2712–2719PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Panza JA, Dilsizian V, Laurienzo JM, et al (1995) Relation between thallium uptake and contractile response to dobutamine. Implications regarding myocardial viability in patients with chronic coronary artery disease and left ventricular dysfunction. Circulation 91:990–998PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Baumgartner H, Porenta G, Lau YK, et al (1998) Assessment of myocardial viability by dob-utamine echocardiography, positron emission tomography and thallium-201 SPECT: correlation with histopathology in explanted hearts. J Am Coll Cardiol 32:1701–1708PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Pagano D, Bonser RS, Townend JN, et al (1998) Predictive value of dobutamine echocardiog-raphy and positron emission tomography in identifying hibernating myocardium in patients with post ischaemic heart failure. Heart 79:281–288PubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Wellnhofer E, Olariu A, Klein C, et al (2004) Magnetic resonance low-dose dobutamine test is superior to SCAR quantification for the prediction of functional recovery. Circulation 109:2172–2174PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Bove CM, DiMaria JM, Voros S, et al (2006) Dobutamine response and myocardial infarct transmurality: functional improvement after coronary artery bypass grafting — initial experience. Radiology 240:835–841PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Ramani K, Judd RM, Holly TA, et al (1998) Contrast magnetic resonance imaging in the assessment of myocardial viability in patients with stable coronary artery disease and left ventricular dysfunction. Circulation 98:2687–2694PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Kim RJ, Manning WJ (2004) Viability assessment by delayed enhancement cardiovascular magnetic resonance: will low-dose dobutamine dull the shine?. Circulation 109:2476–2479PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Lu C, Carlino M, Fragasso G, et al (2000) Enoximone echocardiography for predicting recovery of left ventricular dysfunction after revascularization: a novel test for detecting myocardial viability. Circulation 101:1255–1260PubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Picano E, Marzullo P, Gigli G, et al (1992) Identification of viable myocardium by dipyrida-mole- induced improvement in regional left ventricular function assessed by echocardiogra-phy in myocardial infarction and comparison with thallium scintigraphy at rest. Am J Cardiol 70:703–710PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Varga A, Sicari R, Picano E, et al (1996) Infra-low dose dipyridamole test. A novel dose regimen for selective assessment of myocardial viability by vasodilator stress echocardiography. Eur Heart J 17:629–634PubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Picano E, Ostojic M, Varga A, et al (1996) Combined low dose dipyridamole-dobutamine stress echocardiography to identify myocardial viability. J Am Coll Cardiol 27:1422–1428PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Sicari R, Varga A, Picano E, et al (1999) Comparison of combination of dipyridamole and dobutamine during echocardiography with thallium scintigraphy with thallium scintigraphy to improve viability detection. Am J Cardiol 83:6–10PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Sicari R, Ripoli A, Picano E, et alVIDA (Viability Identification with Dipyridamole Administration) Study Group (2001) The prognostic value of myocardial viability recognized by low dose dipyridamole echocardiography in patients with chronic ischaemic left ventricular dysfunction. Eur Heart J 22:837–844PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Hoffer E P, Dewe W, Celentano C, et al (1999) Low-level exercise echocardiography detects contractile reserve and predicts reversible dysfunction after acute myocardial infarction: comparison with low-dose dobutamine echocardiography. J Am Coll Cardiol 34:989–997PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Lancellotti P, Hoffer E P, Piérard LA (2003) Detection and clinical usefulness of a biphasic response during exercise echocardiography early after myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol 41:1142–1147PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Sicari R, Picano E, Landi P, et al (1997) Prognostic value of dobutamine-atropine stress echocardiography early after acute myocardial infarction. Echo Dobutamine International Cooperative (EDIC) Stud y. J Am Coll Cardiol 29:254–260PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Carlos ME, Smart SC, Wynsen JC, et al (1997) Dobutamine stress echocardiography for risk stratification after myocardial infarction. Circulation 95:1402–1410PubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Lee KS, Marwick T, Cook SA, et al (1995) Prognosis of patients with left ventricular dysfunction with and without viable myocardium after myocardial infarction: relative efficacy of medical therapy and revascularization. Circulation 90:2687–2694Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Picano E, Sicari R, Landi P, et al (1998) Prognostic value of myocardial viability in medically treated patients with global left ventricular dysfunction early after an acute uncomplicated myocardial infarction: a dobutamine stress echocardiographic study. Circulation 98:1078–1084PubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Meluzin J, Cerny J, Frelich M, et al (1998) Prognostic value of the amount of dysfunctional but viable myocardium in revascularized patients with coronary artery disease and left ventricular dysfunction. Investigators of this Multicenter Study. J Am Coll Cardiol 32:912–920PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Senior R, Kaul S, Lahiri A (1999) Myocardial viability on echocardiography predicts long-term survival after revascularization in patients with ischemic congestive heart failure. J Am Coll Cardiol 33:1848–1854PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Cortigiani L, Sicari R, Picano E, et al (2007) VIDA (Viability Identification with Dobutamine Administration) Study Group. Dobutamine stress echocardiography and the effect of revas-cularization on outcome in diabetic and non-diabetic patients with chronic ischaemic left ventricular dysfunction. Eur J Heart Fail 9:1038–1043PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Sicari R, Picano E, Cortigiani L, et al (2003) VIDA (Viability Identification with Dobutamine Administration) Study Group. Prognostic value of myocardial viability recognized by low-dose dobutamine echocardiography in chronic ischemic left ventricular dysfunction. Am J Cardiol 92:1263–1266PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Allman KC, Shaw LJ, Hachamovitch R, et al (2002) Myocardial viability testing and impact of revascularization on prognosis in patients with coronary artery disease and left ventricular dysfunction: a meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol 39:1151–1158PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Kaul S (1995) There may be more to myocardial viability than meets the eye. Circulation 92:2790–2793PubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Armstrong WF (1996) “ Hibernating” myocardium: asleep or part dead? J Am Coll Cardiol 28:530–535PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Bolognese L, Cerisano G, Buonamici P, et al (1997) Influence of infarct-zone viability on left ventricular remodeling after acute myocardial infarction. Circulation 96:3353–3359PubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Rizzello V, Poldermans D, Boersma E, et al (2004) Opposite patterns of left ventricular remodeling after coronary revascularization in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy: role of myocardial viability. Circulation 110:2383–2388PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Chan J, Khafagi F, Young AA, et al (2008) Impact of coronary revascularization and transmu-ral extent of scar on regional left ventricular remodelling. Eur Heart J 29:1608–1617PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Pennell DJ, Sechtem U P, Higgins CB, et al (2004) Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance; Working Group on Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance of the European Society of Cardiology: clinical indications for cardiovascular magnetic resonance [CMR]: Consensus Panel report. Eur Heart J 25:1940–1965PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Picano E (2004) Sustainability of medical imaging. Educational and Debate. BMJ 328:578–80PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Picano E (2004) Informed consent and communication of risk from radiological and nuclear medicine examinations: how to escape from a communication inferno. BMJ Educational and Debate. BMJ 329:849–851PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Picano E (2003) Stress echocardiography: a historical perspective. Am J Med 114:126–130PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Bedetti G, Botto N, Picano E, et al (2008) Cumulative patient effective dose in cardiology. BJR 81:805–813CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Correia MJ, Hellies A, Picano E, et al (2005) Lack of radiological awareness among physicians working in a tertiary-care cardiological centre. Int J Cardiol 105:307–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Bedetti G, Pizzi C, Picano E, et al (2008) Suboptimal awareness of radiologic dose among patients undergoing cardiac stress scintigraphy. J Am Coll Radiol 5:126–131PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Pellikka PA, Nagueh S F, Elhendy AA, et alAmerican Society of Echocardiography (2007). American Society of Echocardiography recommendations for performance, interpretation, and application of stress echocardiography. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 20:1021–1041PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Sicari R, Nihoyannopoulos P, Evangelista A, et alEuropean Association of Echocardiogra-phy (2008) Stress echocardiography expert consensus statement: European Association of Echocardiography (EAE) (a registered branch of the ESC). Eur J Echocardiogr 9:415–437PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Douglas PS, Khandheria B, Stainback R F, et alAmerican College of Cardiology Foundation; American Society of Echocardiography; American College of Emergency Physicians; American Heart Association; American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions; Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (2008) ACCF/ASE/ACEP/AHA/ASNC/ SCAI/SCCT/SCMR 2008 appropriateness criteria for stress echocardiography: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriateness Criteria Task Force, American Society of Echocardiography, American College of Emergency Physicians, American Heart Association, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, Society for Cardiovascular Angiog-raphy and Interventions, Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, and Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance endorsed by the Heart Rhythm Society and the Society of Critical Care Medicine. J Am Coll Cardiol 51:1127–1147PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Luc Piérard
    • 1
  • Eugenio Picano
    1. 1.Department of CardiologyUniversity Hospital Sart Tilman B-35LiégeBelgium

    Personalised recommendations