Coronary Artery Disease: Khandheria B

Douglas PS, Khandheria B, Stainback RF, Weissman NJ, Peterson ED, Hendel RC, Stainback RF, Blaivas M, Des Prez RD, Gillam LD, Golash T, Hiratzka LF, Kussmaul WG, Labovitz AJ, Lindenfeld J, Masoudi FA, Mayo PH, Porembka D, Spertus JA, Wann LS, Wiegers SE, Brindis RG, Douglas PS, Hendel RC, Patel MR, Peterson ED, Wolk MJ, Allen JM, Anonymous00094, Anonymous00095, Anonymous00096, Anonymous00097, Anonymous00098, Anonymous00099, Anonymous00100, Anonymous00101. · No affiliation provided · J Am Coll Cardiol. · Pubmed #18342240 No free full text.

Abstract: The American College of Cardiology Foundation (ACCF) and the American Society of Echocardiography (ASE) together with key specialty and subspecialty societies, conducted an appropriateness review for stress echocardiography. The review assessed the risks and benefits of stress echocardiography for several indications or clinical scenarios and scored them on a scale of 1 to 9 (based upon methodology developed by the ACCF to assess imaging appropriateness). The upper range (7 to 9) implies that the test is generally acceptable and is a reasonable approach, and the lower range (1 to 3) implies that the test is generally not acceptable and is not a reasonable approach. The midrange (4 to 6) indicates a clinical scenario for which the indication for a stress echocardiogram is uncertain. The indications for this review were drawn from common applications or anticipated uses, as well as from current clinical practice guidelines. Use of stress echocardiography for risk assessment in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) was viewed favorably, while routine repeat testing and general screening in certain clinical scenarios were viewed less favorably. It is anticipated that these results will have a significant impact on physician decision making and performance, reimbursement policy, and will help guide future research.

Douglas PS, Khandheria B, Stainback RF, Weissman NJ, Peterson ED, Hendel RC, Stainback RF, Blaivas M, Des Prez RD, Gillam LD, Golash T, Hiratzka LF, Kussmaul WG, Labovitz AJ, Lindenfeld J, Masoudi FA, Mayo PH, Porembka D, Spertus JA, Wann LS, Wiegers SE, Brindis RG, Douglas PS, Patel MR, Wolk MJ, Allen JM, Anonymous00125, Anonymous00126, Anonymous00127, Anonymous00128, Anonymous00129, Anonymous00130, Anonymous00131, Anonymous00132. · Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA. · Circulation. · Pubmed #18316491 links to  free full text

Abstract: The American College of Cardiology Foundation (ACCF) and the American Society of Echocardiography (ASE) together with key specialty and subspecialty societies, conducted an appropriateness review for stress echocardiography. The review assessed the risks and benefits of stress echocardiography for several indications or clinical scenarios and scored them on a scale of 1 to 9 (based upon methodology developed by the ACCF to assess imaging appropriateness). The upper range (7 to 9) implies that the test is generally acceptable and is a reasonable approach, and the lower range (1 to 3) implies that the test is generally not acceptable and is not a reasonable approach. The midrange (4 to 6) indicates a clinical scenario for which the indication for a stress echocardiogram is uncertain. The indications for this review were drawn from common applications or anticipated uses, as well as from current clinical practice guidelines. Use of stress echocardiography for risk assessment in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) was viewed favorably, while routine repeat testing and general screening in certain clinical scenarios were viewed less favorably. It is anticipated that these results will have a significant impact on physician decision making and performance, reimbursement policy, and will help guide future research.

Douglas PS, Khandheria B, Stainback RF, Weissman NJ, Peterson ED, Hendel RC, Stainback RF, Blaivas M, Des Prez RD, Gillam LD, Golash T, Hiratzka LF, Kussmaul WG, Labovitz AJ, Lindenfeld J, Masoudi FA, Mayo PH, Porembka D, Spertus JA, Wann LS, Wiegers SE, Brindis RG, Douglas PS, Hendel RC, Patel MR, Peterson ED, Wolk MJ, Allen JM, Anonymous00137, Anonymous00138, Anonymous00139, Anonymous00140, Anonymous00141, Anonymous00142, Anonymous00143, Anonymous00144, Anonymous00145, Anonymous00146. · Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA. · Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. · Pubmed #18314889 No free full text.

Abstract: The American College of Cardiology Foundation (ACCF) and the American Society of Echocardiography (ASE) together with key specialty and subspecialty societies, conducted an appropriateness review for stress echocardiography. The review assessed the risks and benefits of stress echocardiography for several indications or clinical scenarios and scored them on a scale of 1 to 9 (based upon methodology developed by the ACCF to assess imaging appropriateness). The upper range (7 to 9) implies that the test is generally acceptable and is a reasonable approach, and the lower range (1 to 3) implies that the test is generally not acceptable and is not a reasonable approach. The midrange (4 to 6) indicates a clinical scenario for which the indication for a stress echocardiogram is uncertain.The indications for this review were drawn from common applications or anticipated uses, as well as from current clinical practice guidelines. Use of stress echocardiography for risk assessment in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) was viewed favorably, while routine repeat testing and general screening in certain clinical scenarios were viewed less favorably. It is anticipated that these results will have a significant impact on physician decision making and performance, reimbursement policy, and will help guide future research.

Liang HY, Cauduro S, Pellikka P, Wang J, Urheim S, Yang EH, Rihal C, Belohlavek M, Khandheria B, Miller FA, Abraham TP. · Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN 55905, USA. · Am J Cardiol. · Pubmed #17145214 No free full text.

Abstract: We investigated the influence of > or =70% luminal coronary artery stenosis on regional diastolic deformation at rest using 2-dimensional strain echocardiography. We prospectively imaged patients during/within 24 hours of coronary angiography. Longitudinal systolic (SRs), early (SRe), and late diastolic strain rates, systolic, early, and late diastolic strain and times to isovolumic relaxation and peak SRe were measured in the 3 major vascular territories. Regions subtended by > or =70% coronary stenosis were labeled ischemic. Ischemic regions were compared with the same region in patients without significant coronary stenosis. Of 61 enrolled patients (38 men), 39 had > or =70% coronary stenosis (1 vessel in 14, 2 vessels in 15, 3 vessels in 10), and 15 had normal coronary arteries. There were no significant differences between the normal and ischemic groups with regard to age (59 +/- 13 vs 64 +/- 10 years, p = 0.20), clinical variables (dyslipidemia, smoking, diabetes), systolic (130 +/- 26 vs 139 +/- 31 mm Hg, p = 0.38) or diastolic (72 +/- 13 vs 72 +/- 11 mm Hg, p = 0.81) blood pressure and ejection fraction (58 +/- 12% vs 56 +/- 11%, p = 0.66). SRs and SRe were significantly decreased in ischemic compared with normal regions in all vascular distributions. SRs and SRe together (values below cutoff) or SRe alone were the most specific (93%) and SRe or SRs below cutoff the most sensitive (93%) parameters for detecting ischemic regions. In conclusion, analysis of regional deformation by 2-dimensional strain echocardiography enables detection of significantly diseased coronary arteries at rest. Altered diastolic deformation at rest identifies regions subtended by > or =70% coronary stenosis with high specificity.

Takemoto Y, Pellikka PA, Wang J, Modesto KM, Cauduro S, Belohlavek M, Seward JB, Thomson HL, Khandheria B, Abraham TP. · Division of Cardiovascular Diseases, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA. · J Am Soc Echocardiogr. · Pubmed #16153511 No free full text.

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Strain echocardiography can depict segmental mechanical activity with high temporal and spatial accuracy, and may allow assessment of segmental relaxation not possible with conventional echocardiography. METHODS: Conventional and strain echocardiography were performed in healthy volunteers (young [group 1] and old [group 2]) and patients with normal 2-dimensional and stress echocardiography, with either normal global diastolic function (group 3a) or grade I or II global diastolic dysfunction (DD) (group 3b). Standard echocardiography criteria were used to define global DD. Early to late diastolic strain rate ratio less than 1.1 was defined as altered segmental relaxation. RESULTS: All participants had normal wall motion and ejection fraction. Participants of group 1 had normal segmental and global diastolic function. Participants of groups 2 and 3a demonstrated a wide range of altered segmental relaxation in the absence of global DD. All patients of group 3b had 12 or more segments with altered relaxation and global DD. Age and hypertension were associated with a larger number of altered segments, a lower mean early to late diastolic strain rate ratio, and global DD. CONCLUSIONS: A wide range of altered segmental relaxation can exist in the absence of global DD. Age and hypertension are associated with altered segmental relaxation and global DD. Assessment of segmental relaxation may be beneficial in the elderly and patients with hypertension.

Yip G, Khandheria B, Belohlavek M, Pislaru C, Seward J, Bailey K, Tajik AJ, Pellikka P, Abraham T. · Division of Cardiovascular Diseases, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN 55905, USA. · J Am Coll Cardiol. · Pubmed #15489101 No free full text.

Abstract: OBJECTIVES: This study was designed to determine whether strain echocardiography parameters reflect changes in regional myocardial perfusion during dobutamine stress. BACKGROUND: Strain echocardiography depicts regional myocardial mechanical activity. Ischemia has been shown to reduce systolic strain rate (sSR) and prolong the time to regional lengthening (T(RL)). In an experimental model, we tested whether sSR and T(RL) tracked dobutamine-induced changes in regional myocardial perfusion (regional myocardial blood flow [RMBF]), as measured by colored microspheres. METHODS: We used a closed-chest pig model of nonocclusive coronary stenosis (n = 14) created by inflating an angioplasty balloon in the proximal left anterior descending artery. Invasive hemodynamics, RMBF, and strain parameters were measured at baseline and peak dobutamine stimulation before and during the coronary stenosis. We compared segments with reduced RMBF versus those with preserved RMBF at peak dobutamine stimulation. RESULTS: Peak sSR correlated with RMBF (r = 0.70). In the absence of coronary stenosis, dobutamine stimulation caused a significant increase in RMBF and sSR and a decrease in T(RL). This response was blunted during coronary stenosis. Using the "best cutoff" method, the sensitivity and specificity for prediction of reduced RMBF (ischemia) was 81% and 91% for sSR and 65% and 91% for T(RL), respectively. These changes occurred in the absence of any change in global systolic and diastolic function (dP/dT(max), dP/dT(min), and tau). CONCLUSIONS: Novel strain parameters that depict regional myocardial mechanics are able to predict changes in RMBF during dobutamine stress. Quantitative strain parameters may complement current echocardiographic techniques for ischemia detection and potentially improve the accuracy and reproducibility of stress echocardiography.