Meave A

Language: Spanish
References: 17
Page: 157-159
PDF size: 0. Kb.

ABSTRACT

Nuclear magnetic resonance is the “gold standard” technique to quantify the ventricular volume, the ejection fraction, and the myocardial mass. In patients suffering from ischemic cardiopathy, the ejection fraction is the most important prognostic parameter, even above from lessoned arteries index. An adequate diagnose between a non-viable and a viable myocardium is of great importance in the therapeutic approach for ischemic cardiopathy. By administrating a paramagnetic contrast media named gadolinium, fist pass and late-reinforcement techniques, are applied. With these, it is possible to evaluate the perfusion as well as necrotic areas. In order to identify sub-endocardium ischemia, drugs such as adenosine and dipiridamol, are employed as vasodilators. This technique allows the definition of reinforcement extension, being sub-endocardiac, which is an ailment which affects 50% of the myocardium depth, or even, transmural compromise.

REFERENCES

1. Meave A, Alexánderson E: Utilidad de la resonancia magnética en el paciente con infarto del miocardio. Arch Cardiol Mex 2003; 73: 59-61.

2. Marcu C, Beek A, van Rossum A: Clinical applications of cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging. CMAJ 2006; 175(8):

3. Lewis S, Sawada S, Ryan T, et al: Segmental wall motion abnormalities in the absence of clinically documented myocardial infarction: clinical significance and evidence of hibernating myocardium. Am Heart J 1991; 121: 1088-94.

4. Rahimtoola SH: The hibernating myocardium. Am Heart J 1989; 117: 211-21.

5. Pennell DJ, Sechtem UP, Higgins CB, et al: Clinical indications for cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR): Consensus Panel report. Eur Heart J 2004; 25: 1940-65.

6. Mock MB, Ringqvist I, Fiksher LD, et al: Survival of medically treated patients in the Coronary Artery Surgery Study (CASS) registry. Circulation 1982; 66: 562-8.

7. Sheehan FH: Determinants of improved left ventricular function after thrombolytic therapy in acute myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol 1987; 9: 937-44.

8. Allman KC, show LJ, Hachamovitch R, et al: Myocardial viability testing and impact of revascularization on prognosis in patients with coronary artery disease and left ventricular dysfunction: a meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2002; 39: 1151-8.

9. Kim RJ, Shah DJ, Judd RM: How we perform delayed enhancement imaging. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 2003; 5: 505-14.

10. Kim R, Wu E, Rafael A, et al: The use of contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging to identify reversible myocardial dysfunction. N Engl J Med 2000; 343: 1445-53.

11. Thomson LE, Kim RJ, Judd RM: Magnetic resonance imaging for the assessment of myocardial viability. J Magn Reson Imaging 2004; 19: 771-88.

12. Gerber BL, Garot J, Bluemke DA, et al: Accuracy of contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in predicting improvement of regional myocardial function in patients after acute myocardial infarction. Circulation 2002; 106: 1083-9.

13. Al-Saadi N, Nagel E, Gross M, et al: Noninvasive detection of myocardial ischemia from perfusion reserve based on cardiovascular magnetic resonance. Circulation 2000; 101: 1379-1383.

14. Higgings CB: Prediction of myocardial viability by MRI. Circulation 1999; 99: 727-729.

15. Nagel E, Lehmkul HB, Bocksch W, et al: Noninvasive diagnosis of ischemia-induced wall motion abnormalities with the use of high-dose dobutamine stress MRI: comparison with dobutamine stress echocardiography. Circulation 1999; 99: 763.

16. Kim RJ, Shah DJ: Fundamental concepts in myocardial viability assessment revisited: when knowing how much is “alive” is not enough. Heart 2004; 90: 137-40.

17. Kuhl HP, Beek AM, van der Weerdt AP, et al. Myocardial viability in chronic ischemic heart disease: comparison of contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging with (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2003; 41: 1341-8.