1984
DOI: 10.1016/0002-8703(84)90150-9
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Application of digital techniques to selective coronary arteriography: Use of myocardial contrast appearance time to measure coronary flow reserve

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

1
30
0
3

Year Published

1984
1984
1998
1998

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 197 publications
(34 citation statements)
references
References 28 publications
1
30
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…From these measurements, a relative coronary flow index (F1) was obtained [1][2][3][4]10 106 microspheres suspended in 10 ml of 370 C saline was used. The sample was carefully ultrasonicated and vortexed and then injected over 60 seconds through the left atrial line.…”
Section: Coronary Blood Flow Measurementsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…From these measurements, a relative coronary flow index (F1) was obtained [1][2][3][4]10 106 microspheres suspended in 10 ml of 370 C saline was used. The sample was carefully ultrasonicated and vortexed and then injected over 60 seconds through the left atrial line.…”
Section: Coronary Blood Flow Measurementsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…New developments in X-ray imaging introduced by Vogel et al have led to the computation of relative regional myocardial flow in the control and maximal flow states by means of contrast medium appearance techniques following the administration of a coronary vasodilator [4]. By means of this approach, coronary flow reserve (CFR), defined as the ratio of maximum coronary flow after a maximal vasodilatory stimulus to resting flow, can be determined.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The intrinsic limitations of angiography, proven time after time by intravascular ultrasound and direct translesional physiology, should, by now, be wellunderstood and accepted. The percent diameter stenosis [2], the angiographic stenotic flow reserve (calculated from the angiographic anatomy) [3], and, in some respect, the attempt to equate contrast flow image edge rates with true coronary blood flow [4][5][6] cannot substitute for, nor accurately gauge, the real physiologic effects of an intervention. The use of mean transit time of contrast flowing through a coronary artery to measure blood flow has already been proven too difficult to be used clinically [4][5][6].…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%