Bober Robert M, Thompson Caleb D, Morin Daniel P
John Ochsner Heart and Vascular Institute, Department of Cardiology, Ochsner Medical Center, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Ochsner Clinical School, Queensland University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA, USA.
J Nucl Cardiol. 2017 Jun;24(3):961-974. doi: 10.1007/s12350-016-0442-2. Epub 2016 Mar 28.
We examined whether regional improvement in stress myocardial blood flow (sMBF) following angiography-guided coronary revascularization depends on the existence of a perfusion defect on positron emission tomography (PET).
Percent stenosis on coronary angiography often is the main factor when deciding whether to perform revascularization, but it does not reliably relate to maximum sMBF. PET is a validated method of assessing sMBF.
19 patients (79% M, 65 ± 12 years) underwent PET stress before and after revascularization (17 PCI, 2 CABG). Pre- and post-revascularization sMBF for each left ventricular quadrant (anterior, septal, lateral, and inferior) was stratified by the presence or absence of a baseline perfusion defect on PET and whether that region was revascularized.
Intervention was performed on 40 of 76 quadrants. When a baseline perfusion defect existed in a region that was revascularized (n = 26), post-revascularization flow increased by 0.6 ± 0.7 cc/min/g (1.2 ± 0.4 vs 1.7 ± 0.8, P < 0.001). When no defect existed but revascularization was performed (n = 14), sMBF did not change significantly (1.7 ± 0.3 vs 1.5 ± 0.4 cc/min/g, P = 0.16). In regions without a defect that were not revascularized (n = 29), sMBF did not significantly change (2.0 ± 0.6 vs 1.9 ± 0.7, P = 0.7).
When a stress-induced perfusion defect exists on PET, revascularization improves sMBF in that region. When there is no such defect, sMBF shows no net change, whether or not intervention is performed in that area. PET stress may be useful for identifying areas of myocardium that could benefit from revascularization, and also areas in which intervention is unlikely to yield improvement in myocardial blood flow.
我们研究了血管造影引导下冠状动脉血运重建术后应激性心肌血流(sMBF)的区域改善是否取决于正电子发射断层扫描(PET)上灌注缺损的存在。
冠状动脉造影上的狭窄百分比通常是决定是否进行血运重建的主要因素,但它与最大sMBF并无可靠关联。PET是评估sMBF的一种有效方法。
19例患者(79%为男性,年龄65±12岁)在血运重建术前和术后接受了PET应激检查(17例行经皮冠状动脉介入治疗[PCI],2例行冠状动脉旁路移植术[CABG])。根据PET上是否存在基线灌注缺损以及该区域是否进行了血运重建,对每个左心室象限(前壁、间隔、侧壁和下壁)的血运重建术前和术后sMBF进行分层。
76个象限中的40个进行了干预。当在进行血运重建的区域存在基线灌注缺损时(n = 26),血运重建后血流增加了0.6±0.7 cc/min/g(1.2±0.4对比1.7±0.8,P < 0.001)。当不存在缺损但进行了血运重建时(n = 14),sMBF没有显著变化(1.7±0.3对比1.5±0.4 cc/min/g;P = 0.16)。在没有缺损且未进行血运重建的区域(n = 29),sMBF没有显著变化(2.0±0.6对比1.9±0.7;P = 0.7)。
当PET上存在应激性灌注缺损时,血运重建可改善该区域的sMBF。当不存在此类缺损时,无论该区域是否进行干预,sMBF均无净变化。PET应激检查可能有助于识别可从血运重建中获益的心肌区域,以及干预不太可能改善心肌血流的区域。