HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Furutani, Y. Articles by Matsuzaki, M. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Furutani, Y. Articles by Matsuzaki, M.

Quantification of Area at Risk in Acute Myocardial Infarction by Tomographie Imaging

Second Department of Internal Medicine, Yamaguchi University School of Medicine, Ube, and Division of Cardiology, Tokuyama Central Hospital, Tokuyama, Yamaguchi, Japan

Correspondence: For correspondence or reprints contact: Yuhji Furutani, MD, Second Department of Internal Medicine, Yamaguchi University School of Medicine, 1144 Kogushi, Nishi-ku, Ube, Yamaguchi 755, Japan.

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this study was twofold: to validate, in a phantom heart model, a simple threshold technique for the quantification of defect size using ¹²³I-15-(p-iodophenyl)-3-(R,S)-methyl pentadecanoic acid (BMIPP)imaging and to compare,in patients with acute myocardial infarction, defect size as shown by BMIPP imaging, with the extent of severe hypokinesis shown by left ventriculography. Methods: In a phantom study, defect size was calculated using a standard geometric formula. In a clinical study, BMIPP imaging was performed in 20 patients 10 ± 5 days after the onset of their infarction. Using the centerline method, the area at risk was defined by contrast ventriculography as the percentage of chords with wall motion >2 s.d. below normal. Results: In the phantom study, a threshold value of 60% yielded the best agreement between true and measured defect size. In the clinical study, the defect size shown by BMIPP imaging was greater in anterior than in inferior infarcts (p < 0.001) and correlated well with the risk area revealed by contrast ventriculography (r = 0.80, p < 0.0001) Conclusion: The above preliminary data, admittedly from a small group of patients, suggest that tomographic BMIPP imaging provides an accurate quantification of defect size by means of a simple threshold technique and, in the subacute phase, permits determination of the amount of myocardium at risk after acute myocardial infarction.

Key Words: BMIPP • area at risk • acute myocardial infarction