Myocardial contrast echocardiography in human beings: Correlation of resting perfusion defects to sestamibi single photon emission computed tomography

Comparison of myocardial contrast echocardiography with NC100100 and 99mTc sestamibi SPECT for detection of resting myocardial perfusion abnormalities in patients with previous myocardial infarction

“…The results of the present investigation extend these earlier observations to the situation of patients with a previous myocardial infarction 23. To obtain a detailed description of the perfusion status of these patients, we first compared resting segmental perfusion with resting segmental contraction.…”

Correlation between myocardial perfusion abnormalities detected with intermittent imaging using intravenous perfluorocarbon microbubbles and radioisotope imaging during high‐dose dipyridamole stress echo

“…Finally, we required that full left ventricular cavity opacification in real time be present before beginning triggered sequences in order to reduce the number of false positive contrast defects due to inadequate microbubbles concentrations reaching the imaging plane. Because of this, we believe the results of this multicenter study were close to the results obtained at experienced single-center sites [12][13][14][15][16][20][21] and significantly better than multicenter studies where there was inexperience with interpreting artifacts and only one short triggering interval. 22 Use of multiple triggering intervals also improved the diagnostic capabilities of this technique, in that only defects that persisted at the 1/3 triggering interval were considered true defects.…”

Quantitative evaluation of myocardial perfusion in patients with revascularized myocardial infarction: comparison between intravenous myocardial contrast echocardiography and 99mTc-sestamibi single photon emission computed tomography

“…For instance, the results of the one intra-arterial MCE study 1 are difficult to interpret, as myocardial intensity dynamics after intra-arterial injection inherently differ from those following intravenous injection. Furthermore, most studies use less and larger segments than the standard 16-segment ASE-model, 1e3,7e10 while several other exclude patients with suboptimal echogenicity, 1,3,7,8 pre-select echocardiographic views depending on the location of SPECT perfusion abnormalities, 7,8 pre-select myocardial segments based on the presence of resting wall motion abnormalities, 4,6 employ extensively post-processed ivMCE images, 3,7 or use qualitative rather than quantitative image comparison, 1,3e6,8e10 all of which significantly lower the challenge for MCE to agree with SPECT.…”