(Circulation. 1995;91:1669-1675.)
© 1995 American Heart Association, Inc.
Articles |
From CNR, Institute of Clinical Physiology, Pisa, Italy.
Correspondence to Eugenio Picano, MD, Istituto di Fisiologia Clinica, CNR, Via Paolo Savi, 8, 56126 Pisa, Italy.
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Methods and Results High-dose (up to 0.84 mg/kg over 10 minutes) DSE and coronary angiographic data of 68 in-hospital patients (39 with stable angina, 29 with angina at rest) with nonoccluding, single-vessel disease at angiography and no previous myocardial infarction were analyzed. DSE was performed in all patients within 3 days of coronary angiography. An angiographic lesion was considered complex when irregular borders and/or intraluminal lucencies suggestive of ulcer and/or thrombus were present. According to angiographic lesion morphology, two groups were identified: group 1, with simple coronary lesions, and group 2, with complex coronary lesions. The two groups were matched for number of patients (n=34 in each group), age (group 1, 59±9 versus group 2, 59±10 years, P=NS), and coronary artery stenosis severity by quantitative coronary angiography (group 1, 60±7% versus group 2, 58±6% diameter reduction, P=NS). The sensitivity of DSE was lower in patients of group 1 when compared with group 2 (53% versus 85%, P<.001). Among positive DSE, the low-dose (0.56 mg/kg over 4 minutes) positivity was less frequent in group 1 than in group 2 patients (17% versus 62%, P<.01). Exercise ECG was completed in 66 patients, and it was positive (>.1 mV ST-segment shift from baseline) in 20 out of 33 group 1 and in 22 out of 33 group 2 patients (61% versus 67%, P=NS). The peak rate-pressure product tended to be higher in group 1 than in group 2 patients (257±52 versus 240±64 mm Hgxbeats per minutex102, P=NS).
Conclusions In patients with single-vessel disease without coronary occlusion or previous myocardial infarction, coronary lesion morphology of the complex type is associated with a higher DSE sensitivity and with a greater prevalence of low-dose, positive responses. Presence of irregular plaque contours, not only plaque geometry, is important in modulating stress responses in the presence of angiographically assessed coronary artery disease.
Key Words: ischemia stress echocardiography exercise lesion
| Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The aim of the present study was to assess the relation between coronary stenosis morphology and dipyridamole stress echocardiography (DSE) results. Accordingly, DSE data were analyzed in two groups of patients with single-vessel, nonoccluded coronary lesions, matched for quantitatively assessed stenosis severity, and with either "simple" or "complex" coronary lesions.6 7 8 13 Sixty-six of these 68 patients also completed a diagnostic exercise electrocardiography test (EET).
| Methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
50% diameter stenosis by visual assessment), nonoccluded coronary
lesions and no previous myocardial infarction. Of this initial set of
118 patients, 44 were ruled out because of (1) angiographic cinefilms
of insufficient quality for quantitative coronary angiographic
assessment (n=17), (2) stenosis judged to be critical by visual
assessment that was indeed <50% diameter stenosis by quantitative
coronary arteriography (n=15), (3) presence of an obvious resting
dyssynergy (akinesis or dyskinesis) by either two-dimensional
echocardiography or contrast ventriculography (n=11), or (4) segmental
wall motion abnormality during DSE that occurred in a territory outside
the perfusion bed of the stenotic coronary artery (for example,
inferior wall dyssynergy with left anterior descending coronary artery
stenosis) and therefore was more likely to be a false-positive result
than the indicator of ischemic changes in that territory (n=1). From
the remaining 74 patients, on the basis of plaque morphology (complex
in 34, simple in 40) and severity, we selected two groups of 34
patients each, matched for stenosis severity and with either simple
(group 1) or complex (group 2) lesion morphology. Complex plaques were
defined as coronary intraluminal filling defect suggestive of
intraluminal thrombus and/or coronary asymmetric narrowing with
irregular borders and/or multiple irregularities and/or overhanging
edges or with "abrupt proximal face" or a "rough" or
"sawtooth" component suggestive of
ulcers.6 7 8 13 In
66 patients, a diagnostic EET was also completed within 2 days from DET
and under identical antianginal therapy, if any.
The demographic, anamnestic, and clinical findings in the two study
groups are reported in the Table
. Coronary angiography,
DSE, and EET were separately and independently performed and analyzed
by cardiologists unaware of the results of the other tests.
|
Exercise ECG Test
Patients performed a multistage upright
cycle ergometer test,
with an initial load of 25 W and subsequent increments of 25 W every 2
minutes. A 12-lead ECG and blood pressure determination were obtained
at baseline and every minute thereafter. Criteria for interrupting the
test were severe chest pain, diagnostic ST-segment shift, fatigue,
excessive blood pressure rise (systolic blood pressure >240 mm Hg,
diastolic blood pressure >120 mm Hg), limiting dyspnea, or maximal
predicted heart rate in the absence of ischemia.
ECG tracings were
considered diagnostic for myocardial ischemia when an
ST-segment shift of at least 0.10 mV, 0.08 second after the J-point,
could be detected. ECG tracings were analyzed visually by an
experienced cardiologist who was blind to angiographic and dipyridamole
echocardiography test findings. The rate-pressure product (heart
ratexsystolic blood pressure) and exercise time (in minutes), assessed
either at peak exercise (in negative tests) or at the onset of ischemia
(
0.10 mV ST-segment depression in positive tests), were also
evaluated.14
Dipyridamole Echocardiography Test
Two-dimensional
echocardiographic and 12-lead ECG monitoring
were performed in combination with a dipyridamole infusion of 0.56
mg/kg over 4 minutes followed by 4 minutes of no dose and then 0.28
mg/kg in 2 minutes.14 The cumulative dose was therefore
0.84 mg/kg over 10 minutes. Aminophylline (up to 240 mg over 3 minutes)
was readily at hand. During the procedure, the blood pressure and the
ECG were recorded each minute. Two-dimensional echocardiograms were
obtained continuously during and up to 10 minutes after dipyridamole
administration. Commercially available wide-angle, phased-array imaging
systems (Hewlett-Packard 1000 and 1500, Toshiba Sonolayer FFA270A, or
ESAOTE Biomedica SIM 7000; 2.5- and 3.5-MHz transducers) were used. In
the baseline studies as well as during stress, all standard
echocardiographic views were obtained when possible. During the test,
new areas of abnormal wall motion were identified in multiple views
whenever possible. The videotapes were analyzed by the
cardiologist-echocardiographist performing the test, who was blind to
the clinical and angiographic data. The low level of intraobserver and
interobserver variability obtained in our laboratory between
experienced readers has been documented previously.15 A
digital acquisition of images of interest was obtained either on line
(by ESAOTE Biomedica SIM 7000 or Hewlett-Packard Sonos 1500) or off
line by an array processorbased computer for medical image processing
(Mipron), and a side-by-side display of images at rest and peak stress
in a cineloop mode was obtained. A wall motion score index was derived
for rest and peak dipyridamole echocardiograms in each patient. The
left ventricle was divided into 11 segments according to a segmentation
proposed by the Italian Society of Echocardiography and already adopted
in the EPIC multicenter trial on stress
echocardiography.14 The 11 left ventricular segments
considered for the analysis were the apex, proximal and distal
anterior septum, proximal and distal inferior septum, proximal and
distal anterior wall, proximal and distal lateral wall, and proximal
and distal inferior wall.
Segmental wall motion was graded as normal: normal motion at rest, with normal/increased wall motion (hyperkinesis) after dipyridamole (score=1); hypokinetic: marked reduction in endocardial motion (score=2); akinetic: virtual absence of inward motion (score=3); or dyskinetic: paradoxical wall motion away from the left ventricular center in systole (score=4). The wall motion score index was derived by summation of individual segment scores divided by the number of interpreted segments. Inadequately visualized segments were not scored. A test result was considered positive when the wall motion score increased by one grade or more at peak stress (for example, a normal segment becoming hypokinetic, akinetic, or dyskinetic). In positive tests, the dipyridamole time, that is, the minutes from the beginning of drug infusion to the development of the stress-induced dyssynergy, was also evaluated. In negative tests, the dipyridamole time was arbitrarily assumed to be 17 minutes (when aminophylline was given).
Angiographic Study
Coronary angiography in multiple views was
performed according
to the standard Judkins or Sones technique. At least five views
(including two orthogonal views) were acquired for the left and at
least two orthogonal views for the right coronary arteries,
respectively. Additional appropriate projections were obtained in case
of superimposition of side branches or foreshortening of the segment of
interest. A 5-in. field of view of the image intensifier was used. All
angiograms were visually evaluated by two independent observers with an
angiogram projection system (CAP/35BII) that allows frame-by-frame
analysis selection. Magnification of the segment of interest was
used for evaluation of the qualitative angiographic definitions. The
observers identified the stenotic segments and scored stenosis
morphology as simple or complex according to previously stated
criteria. In case of disagreement, a third more experienced observer
(M.M.) reviewed the angiogram, and his judgment was binding. The
interobserver variability in plaque assignment to either simple or
complex morphology was 5%; the intraobserver variability assessed by
the same observer on the same set of 20 angiograms was 5%. All
stenotic segments were evaluated by an automatic edge detection system
(Mipron). A magnification of the region of interest during assessment
was possible. A region of interest of 512x512 pixels was manually
selected and digitized using a high-quality VIDICON videocamera. The
luminal edges were detected on the basis of the weighted sum of the
first and second derivative functions of the brightness profile of each
scan line perpendicular to the vessel centerline. From these contours,
the vessel diameter function was determined by computing the shortest
distance between the left and right contour position.
The tip of the angiographic catheter was used as a scaling device, and this allowed the diameters to be obtained as absolute values (expressed in millimeters). The percent diameter stenosis (in the projection in which the stenosis appeared most severe) and the minimum cross-sectional area (a mean of the values obtained in two orthogonal projections, in millimeters squared) were measured for each coronary artery stenosis. The previously assessed intraobserver and interobserver variabilities of the method were 7% and 6%, respectively.16
Statistical Analysis
Values are expressed as mean±SD.
For both the exercise ECG test
and the dipyridamole echocardiography test, sensitivity and specificity
in detecting angiographically assessed coronary artery disease were
calculated according to standard definitions. Differences between the
results of the exercise ECG test and the dipyridamole echocardiography
test in the different angiographic subsets were compared by using the
2 test; a Fisher's exact test was used when
appropriate. Comparison between groups for continuous data were made
with the Student's t test for unpaired values. A
P value <.05 was considered statistically significant.
| Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
|
|
Exercise Stress Test
No major complications occurred during
EET. In two patients, the
EET could not be performed and/or completed up to diagnostic end
points. In the remaining 66 patients, the EET was positive in 42 and
negative in 24. The peak rate-pressure product was 23 000±5800 in
patients with a positive test and 28 000±4900 mm Hgxbeats per
minute in patients with a negative test (P<.01).
Dipyridamole Stress Echocardiography Results
No major
complications or limiting side effects occurred during
DSE. In the overall population of 68 patients, 47 (69%) had a positive
test. The resting wall motion score was 1±0.04 and rose to
1.3±0.3 at
peak stress. The dipyridamole time was 11±5 minutes. Examples of
negative and positive DSEs are shown in Fig 2
and Fig
3
,
respectively.
Correlation of EET With Angiographic Findings
Of the 66
patients with a diagnostic EET, 33 had a complex type
and 33 a simple type of coronary stenosis. EET positivity was found in
20 of 33 of patients with simple type (group 1) and 22 of the 33
patients with complex type (group 2) plaques (61% versus 67%,
P=NS). The rate-pressure product was higher in patients of
group 1 than in patients of group 2 (25 700±5200 versus
24 000±6400
mm Hgxbeats per minute, P=NS) (Table
).
Correlation of Dipyridamole Stress Results With Angiographic
Findings
Typical examples of angiographic and corresponding
stress-echocardiographic response in a group 1 and a group 2 patient
are shown in Fig 2
and Fig 3
, respectively. The
percentage of positive
results was lower in group 1 than in group 2 (53% versus 85%,
P<.001) (Fig 4
). Considering all patients,
group 1 exhibited longer dipyridamole time (14±4 versus 9±5
minutes,
P<.001; Fig 4
) and lower peak wall motion score
index
(1.2±0.3 versus 1.4±0.3, P<.05), with a similar
resting
wall motion score index versus group 2 (1±0.04 versus 1±0.1,
P=NS); restricting the analysis only to positive
patients, the simple type morphology was associated with a trend to a
longer dipyridamole time (group 1, 10±4 versus group 2, 8±4
minutes,
P=.056), with a less frequent low-dose (0.56 mg/kg)
positivity (17% versus 62%, P<.01) and a similar peak
wall motion score index (group 1, 1.4±0.4 versus group 2,
1.4±0.3,
P=NS).
|
| Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Myocardial and Coronary Effects of Adenosine
Adenosine is
produced intracellularly, but it does not exert its
effects until it leaves the intracellular environment and interacts
with A1 and A2 adenosine receptors on the cell membrane. In the heart,
A1-receptors are found on cardiomyocytes and vascular smooth muscle,
whereas A2-receptors are found on endothelium and vascular smooth
muscle.19 20 The effects of adenosine on coronary
A2-receptors lead to vasodilation and in turn to increased flow.
However, the mechanisms of this effect are complex. Recent work calls
for a reexamination of the conventional view that vasodilation
represents a direct action of adenosine on coronary smooth
muscle. The relaxation of isolated coronary arteries in vitro is at
least in part endothelium dependent, with the vascular smooth muscle
relaxation (endothelium independent) accounting for a rough 70% of
overall relaxationat least in isolated rings of guinea pig
aorta.21 In vivo, the share of
endothelium-dependent relaxation might even increase,
since the A2-receptormediated vasodilation of coronary arterioles
determines an upstream increase in flow that leads to an increase of
shear stress acting on epicardial arteries and to an
endothelium-mediated and adenosine
receptorindependent vasodilation achieved through
endothelium-derived relaxing factor
release.22 Experimental data do indeed demonstrate the
capability of large epicardial coronary arteries to dilate in response
to dipyridamole infusion. Injection of 0.25 mg/kg of dipyridamole in
dogs causes almost a 30% increase in the cross-sectional area of large
coronary arteries.23 Few data are available in humans. On
the average, in patients with severe stenosis, there is a mild effect
on lumen size.24 However, this apparently mild effect can
derive from the algebraic sum of two different actions. The fall in
poststenotic intraluminal distending pressure due to the Venturi effect
may determine a collapse of the lumen for purely passive mechanisms,
whereas a direct effectunopposed in normal arteriesis a coronary
relaxation.
Relation of Coronary Stenosis Morphology to Stress Test
Response
The angiographic pattern of complex coronary stenosis
morphology
is associated with more extensive endothelial involvement by
disease.6 7 8 During dipyridamole or
exercise, loss of
endothelial integrity (more pronounced in the complex plaque) reduces
flow-mediated and endothelium-mediated vasodilation of
large epicardial arteries without affecting
endothelium-independent dilation of small resistance
coronary vessels. Since epicardial vessel diameter is related to the
fourth power of the vessel resistance to flow, even a minimally reduced
increase in epicardial artery luminal diameter markedly increases
transtenotic pressure gradient and therefore the functional severity of
stenosis.25
In other words, the downstream dilation achieved by physiologically or pharmacologically induced rise of interstitial adenosine decreases the overall network resistance, thereby increasing flow through upstream segments. This would cause upstream myogenic and flow-induced vasodilation, synergistically acting with adenosine direct receptor-mediated vasodilation. Damage to the endothelium might abolish this response to blood flow. The combined loss of receptor-dependent and flow-mediated vasodilation might easily abolish the vasodilation of large coronary arteries. In this way, the coronary vasodilation due to arteriolar effects, unmatched by epicardial artery dilation, leads to a greater transtenotic pressure loss and to lower perfusion pressure, with greater prevalence of subendocardial ischemia after either exercise or dipyridamole infusion.
Comparison With Previous Studies
Complex coronary stenosis
morphology is found in about 70% of
patients with unstable angina and in 66% of patients with myocardial
infarction and is detectable in about 20% to 30% of patients with
chronic stable angina.6 7 8 In our study
population, there
was no higher prevalence of angina at rest in the group with complex
type lesions, as it might have been expected. However, one has to take
into account the selection criteria of our study: All our patients
could withstand stress testing, and therefore unstable angina syndromes
referred directly to angiography could not be included in our study
population. In most patients, clinical condition allowed therapy
withdrawal before testing, indicating that none had refractory angina
or preinfarction angina. In addition, the angiographic entry criteria
of nonoccluded, single-vessel disease probably tends to exclude
unstable more than stable clinical syndromes.
Tousoulis et al10 evaluated the relation between coronary stenosis morphology and coronary vasomotor effect of serotonin. They found that in patients with stable effort angina as well as in patients with variant angina, the magnitude of the vasoconstrictor response to serotonin at the site of an atheromatous coronary plaque was more closely related to irregular contour rather than to stenosis severity. The study of Tousoulis et al is different from ours in many aspects, since they evaluated coronary reactivity in a direct fashion, through serial quantitative angiographic assessment, whereas we assessed the ischemic potential of the plaque indirectly through provocative testing. Furthermore, they assessed the vasoconstrictive tendency of the coronary plaque, whereas myocardial vulnerability to dipyridamole and exercise-induced ischemia is more an expression of depressed vasodilator capability. Nevertheless, increased angiographic reactivity to vasoconstrictor stimuli and enhanced susceptibility to ischemia after vasodilator stress might be two tightly interrelated aspects of the same pathophysiological defect at the endothelial level of the complex plaque. Damage to the endothelium leads to failure to produce dilatory factors, thus enhancing susceptibility to vasoconstrictor stimuli.
Our findings are also consistent with others independently assessing the prognostic value of angiographic complex type morphology6 7 8 9 26 27 and of DSE results, especially after the lower dose,5 28 29 in predicting subsequent events. The results of this study point out that stress echo response is related not only to the classic prognostic determinants of extent and severity of coronary artery disease but, for any given stenosis severity, to plaque morphology as well. In positive DSE, dipyridamole time showed a greater discrimination power than peak wall motion score index in separating simple type from complex type plaques. This is in keeping with previous studies showing that the severity of induced ischemia in the time domainand not in the space domainis correlated to the physiological and prognostic severity of coronary artery disease, especially in patients with single-vessel disease.12 16
Study Limitations
Nonsystematic sources of error in
quantitative coronary
arteriography can be methodology related and patient related. Even
algorithms used for edge detection in quantitative coronary
arteriography can be inaccurate for the correct definition of very
irregular contours, which are encountered with complex type
plaque.5 Changes in vasomotor tone may affect stenosis
measurements in the absence of a standardized vasodilation with
nitrates.5
The assessment of plaque morphology was qualitative and visual. Although analysis of arterial borders with complex computer algorithms has been proposed30 and may allow for a more objective assessment of lesion irregularity or roughness, such techniques do not incorporate an assessment of translucency or filling defects within the borders of the lesion13 and have not been extensively applied to date.10 11 26
Besides being based on a visual assessment of plaque morphology, angiography is a very insensitive technique to detect thrombus and complex plaque in comparison with angioscopy31 and with intravascular ultrasound.32 Finally, the proposed mechanisms to explain the greater ischemic potential of the complex plaque during dipyridamole stress are largely conjectural, and the true mechanism should be addressed in future studies.
Clinical Implications
We are accustomed to think of the
performance of diagnostic tests
in terms of sensitivity to the percent stenosis of a coronary artery,
but the physiological consequences of a stenosis cannot always be
predicted with a simple anatomic-geometric
approach.1 2 3 4 5
Another possible limitation of the anatomic approach is to consider
that all plaquesfor any given stenosis severityare created
angiographically equal. This probably is not true. Different plaque
morphologies not only imply different susceptibilities to occlusion but
probably reflect different degrees of endothelial dysfunction and
reactivity to ischemic stimuli. Results of provocative tests are
probably dependent both on stenosis hydraulics and on stenosis biology.
The results of this study further challenge the hydraulic dogma (that
is, disease severity equals stenosis severity) and emphasize the need
for a more integrated assessment of angiographic data to truly
understand and assess the results of physiological noninvasive
testing.33 Whether the results obtained in this study can
be extrapolated to other pharmacological stresses such as dobutamine
infusion or to other imaging techniques such as perfusion scintigraphy,
whose positivity is related to flow maldistribution rather than to true
ischemia, is an issue to be addressed in future studies. Plaque
morphology establishes an imperfect but crucial link between the
traditional anatomic-geometric view of stenosis and the biology of the
plaquea hidden variable in the traditional
sensitivity-and-specificity approach.
| Acknowledgments |
|---|
Received October 5, 1994; accepted October 14, 1994.
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
2. Hlatky MA, Mark DB, Harrell FE, Lee KL, Califf RM, Pryor DB. Rethinking sensitivity and specificity. Am J Cardiol. 1987;59: 1195-1198.
3. Marcus ML, Skorton DJ, Johnson MR, Collins SM, Harrison DG, Kerber RE. Visual estimates of percent diameter coronary stenosis: a battered gold standard. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1988;11:882-885. [Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
4. Marcus MI, Harrison DG, White CW, McPherson DD, Wilson RF, Kerber RE. Assessing the physiological significance of coronary obstructions in patients: importance of diffuse undetected atherosclerosis. Prog Cardiovasc Dis. 1988;31:39-56. [Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
5.
De Feyter, Serruys P, Davies M, Richardson P, Lubsen J,
Oliver M. Quantitative coronary angiography to measure progression and
regression of coronary atherosclerosis: value, limitations, and
implications for clinical trials. Circulation. 1991;84:412-422.
6. Ambrose JA, Winters SL, Arora RR, Haft JI, Goldstein J, Rentrop KP, Gorlin R, Fuster V. Coronary angiographic morphology in myocardial infarction: a link between the pathogenesis of unstable angina and myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1985;6: 1233-1238.
7. Ambrose JA, Winters SL, Arora RR, Eng A, Riccio A, Gorlin R, Fuster V. Angiographic evolution of coronary artery morphology in unstable angina. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1986;74:472-478.
8. Ambrose JA, Winters SL, Stern A, Eng A, Teichholz LE, Gorlin R, Fuster V. Angiographic morphology and the pathogenesis of unstable angina pectoris. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1985;5:609-616. [Abstract]
9.
Fuster V, Badimon L, Cohen M. Ambrose JA, Badimon JJ,
Chesebro JH. Insight into the pathogenesis of acute ischemic syndromes.
Circulation. 1988;77:1213-1220.
10. Tousoulis D, Davies G, McFadden E, Clarke J, Kaski JC, Maseri A. Coronary vasomotor effects of serotonin in patients with angina: relation to coronary stenosis morphology. Circulation. 1993;88: 1518-1526.
11. Haft JI, Al-Zarka. Comparison of the natural history of irregular and smooth coronary lesions: insights into the pathogenesis, progression, and prognosis of coronary atherosclerosis. Am Heart J. 1993;126:51-56.
12.
Picano E. Stress echocardiography: from pathophysiological toy
to diagnostic tool. Circulation. 1992;85:1604-1612.
13. Ambrose JA, Israel D. Angiography in unstable angina. Am J Cardiol. 1991;68:78B-84B. [Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
14. Picano E, Landi P, Bolognese L, Chiarandà G, Chiarella F, Seveso G, Sclavo MG, Gandolfo N, Previtali M, Orlandini A, et al, on behalf of the EPIC Study Group. The prognostic value of dipyridamole-echocardiography early after uncomplicated myocardial infarction: a large scale multicenter trial. Am J Med. 1993; 11:608-618.
15. Picano E, Lattanzi F, Orlandini A, Marini C, L'Abbate A. Stress echocardiography and the human factor: the importance of being expert. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1991;17:666-669. [Abstract]
16.
Picano E, Parodi O, Lattanzi F, Sambuceti G, Andrade MJ,
Marzullo P, Giorgetti A, Salvadori P, Marzilli M, Distante A.
Assessment of anatomic and physiologic severity of single vessel
coronary artery lesions by dipyridamole echocardiography: comparison
with positron emission tomography and quantitative arteriography.
Circulation. 1994;89:753-761.
17. Lüscher TF, Vanhoutte PM. The endothelium: modulator of cardiovascular function. Boca Raton, Fla: CRC Press; 1990:I-215.
18. Lüscher TF. The endothelium as a target and mediator of cardiovascular disease. Eur J Clin Invest. 1993;23:670-685. [Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
19.
Ely SW, Berne RM. Protective effects of adenosine in
myocardial ischemia. Circulation. 1992;85:893-904.
20. Belardinelli L, Linden J, Berne RM. The cardiac effects of adenosine. Prog Cardiovasc Dis. 1989;32:73-97. [Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
21.
Headrick JP, Berne RM. Endothelium-dependent and
-independent relaxations to adenosine in guinea pig aorta.
Am J Physiol. 1990;259:H62-H67.
22. Chilian WM, Layne SM. Coronary microvascular responses to reductions in perfusion pressure: evidence for persistent arteriolar vasomotor tone during coronary hypoperfusion. Circ Res. 1990;66: 1227-1238.
23.
Hintze TH, Vatner SF. Dipyridamole dilates large coronary
arteries in conscious dogs. Circulation. 1983;68:1321-1327.
24.
Brown BG, Bolson EL, Dodge HT. Dynamic mechanisms in human
coronary stenosis. Circulation. 1984;70:917-922.
25.
Picano E. Dipyridamole-echocardiography test: the historical
background and the physiologic basis. Eur Heart J. 1989;10:365-376.
26. Bugiardini R, Pozzati A, Borghi A, Morgagni GL, Ottani F, Muzi A, Puddu P. Angiographic morphology in unstable angina and its relation to transient myocardial ischemia and hospital outcome. Am J Cardiol. 1991;67:460-464. [Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
27. Ellis S, Alderman EI, Cain K, Wright A, Bourassa M, Fisher L. Morphology of left anterior descending coronary territory lesions as a predictor of anterior myocardial infarction: a CASS registry study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1989;13:1481-1491. [Abstract]
28. Picano E, Severi S, Michelassi C, Lattanzi F, Masini M, Orsini E, Distante A, L'Abbate A. Prognostic importance of dipyridamole-echocardiography test in coronary artery disease. Circulation. 1989; 80:450-459.
29. Severi S, Picano E, Michelassi C, Lattanzi F, Landi P, Distante A, L'Abbate A. Diagnostic and prognostic value of dipyridamole echocardiography in patients with suspected coronary artery disease: comparison with exercise electrocardiography. Circulation. 1994; 89:1160-1173.
30.
Kalbfleisch SJ, McGillem MJ, Simon SB, DeBoe SF, Pinto IMF,
Mancini GBJ. Automated quantification of indexes of coronary lesion
complexity: comparison between patients with stable and unstable
angina. Circulation. 1990;82:439-447.
31. Sherman CT, Litvack F, Grundfest W, Lee M, Hickey A, Chaux A, Kass R, Blanche C, Matloff J, Morgenstern L, et al. Coronary angioscopy in patients with unstable angina pectoris. N Engl J Med. 1986;315:913-919. [Abstract]
32.
Nissen SE, Gurley JG, Grims CL, Booth DC, McClure R, Berk M,
Fischer C, DeMaria A. Intravascular ultrasound assessment of lumen size
and wall morphology in normal subjects and patients with coronary
artery disease. Circulation. 1991;84:1087-1099.
33. Picano E. Stress Echocardiography, 2nd ed. Heidelberg, Germany: Springer-Verlag; 1994.
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
S. Kruger, K.-C. Koch, I. Kaumanns, M. W. Merx, P. Hanrath, and R. Hoffmann Clinical Significance of Fractional Flow Reserve for Evaluation of Functional Lesion Severity in Stent Restenosis and Native Coronary Arteries Chest, September 1, 2005; 128(3): 1645 - 1649. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K C Koch, W M Schaefer, K Ersahin, B Nowak, S Krueger, U Buell, P Hanrath, and R Hoffmann Haemodynamic significance of stent lesions compared to native coronary lesions: a myocardial perfusion imaging study Heart, June 1, 2004; 90(6): 691 - 692. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
L.A. Pierard Evaluating risk in unstable angina: role of pharmacological stress echocardiography Eur. Heart J., July 1, 2000; 21(13): 1041 - 1043. [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Pingitore, E. Picano, A. Varga, G. Gigli, L. Cortigiani, M. Previtali, G. Minardi, M. Quarta Colosso, J. Lowenstein, W. Mathias Jr., et al. Prognostic value of pharmacological stress echocardiography in patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease: A prospective, large-scale, multicenter, head-to-head comparison between dipyridamole and dobutamine test J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., November 15, 1999; 34(6): 1769 - 1777. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M.-J. Hung, C.-H. Wang, and W.-J. Cherng Can Dobutamine Stress Echocardiography Predict Cardiac Events in Nonrevascularized Diabetic Patients Following Acute Myocardial Infarction? Chest, November 1, 1999; 116(5): 1224 - 1232. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
B. D. Beleslin, M. Ostojic, A. Djordjevic-Dikic, R. Babic, M. Nedeljkovic, G. Stankovic, S. Stojkovic, J. Marinkovic, I. Nedeljkovic, J. Stepanovic, et al. Integrated evaluation of relation between coronary lesion features and stress echocardiography results: the importance of coronary lesion morphology J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., March 1, 1999; 33(3): 717 - 726. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C. Palmieri, M. P. R. Sicari, E. Picano, A. Biagini, and M. Marzilli Quantitative Assessment of Coronary Atherosclerotic Plaque Profile by Morphometric Analysis of Angiographic Images Angiology, November 1, 1996; 47(11): 1053 - 1059. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Circulation Home | Subscriptions | Archives | Feedback | Authors | Help | AHA Journals Home | Search Copyright © 1995 American Heart Association, Inc. All rights reserved. Unauthorized use prohibited. |