X-ray densitometry for the measurement of regional myocardial perfusion

Citation
M. Haude et al., X-ray densitometry for the measurement of regional myocardial perfusion, BAS R CARD, 95(3), 2000, pp. 261-270
Citations number
29
Categorie Soggetti
Cardiovascular & Hematology Research
Journal title
BASIC RESEARCH IN CARDIOLOGY
ISSN journal
03008428 → ACNP
Volume
95
Issue
3
Year of publication
2000
Pages
261 - 270
Database
ISI
SICI code
0300-8428(200006)95:3<261:XDFTMO>2.0.ZU;2-3
Abstract
The evaluation of regional myocardial blood flow (RMBF) during cardiac cath eterization is of particular diagnostic interest. The purpose of this inves tigation was to validate x-ray densitometric parameters for the evaluation of RMBF. In five anesthetized dogs, arterial flow in the circumflex coronary artery was measured continuously with an electromagnetic flowmeter, and RMBF was d etermined by colored microspheres. Five different perfusion levels were cre ated by mechanical obstruction of the coronary artery or by intravenous inf usion of adenosine. At each steady-state perfusion level, digital subtracti on coronary angiograms were obtained for densitometric analysis. Results documented a close correlation between the related time parameters 1/Mean Transit Time (1/MTT, r(2) = 0.969), and 1/Rise Time (1/RT, r(2) = 0. 965) and RMBF over a wide range between 0.36 ml/(min . g) and 11.16 ml/(min . g). Maximum myocardial contrast density (Imax) also showed a good, but i nverse correlation (r(2) = 0.889) with RMBF and, therefore, did not reflect vascular volume. Contrast medium Appearance Time (AT) showed no correlatio n to RMBF (r(2) = 0.017). Repeat densitometric measurements for different p erfusion levels revealed a good reproducibility for MTT (accuracy: 0.001 s; precision: 0.447 s or 6.7%) and RT (accuracy: 0.014 s; precision: 0.202 s or 10.4%), while AT (accuracy: 0.072 s; precision: 0.420 s or 68.5%) and Im ax (accuracy: 0.022 GL; precision: 1.197 GL or 44.5%) showed substantial va riation. Myocardial perfusion reserve (MPR) calculated from RT (r(2) = 0.90 ) or MTT (r(2) = 0.94) showed better correlations to RMBF reserve than MPR calculated from AT (r(2) = 0.04). In conclusion, only 1/MTT and 1/RT showed a good reproducibility and a clos e correlation to RMBF Therefore, only these parameters can be recommended f or calculations of RMBF and its reserve under clinical conditions.