Premium
A Head‐to‐Head Comparison of Infusion and Bolus Doses of Adenosine for Stress Myocardial Contrast Echocardiography
Author(s) -
Nesser Hans Joachim,
Yao Jiefen,
Soman Prem,
Tkalec Wolfgang,
Ebner Christian,
SteringerMascherbauer Regina,
Markt Bernhard,
Samenuk David,
Ng ChoiKeung,
Morcerf Fernando,
Udelson James E.,
Pandian Natesa G.
Publication year - 2006
Publication title -
echocardiography
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.404
H-Index - 62
eISSN - 1540-8175
pISSN - 0742-2822
DOI - 10.1111/j.1540-8175.2006.00245.x
Subject(s) - adenosine , medicine , bolus (digestion) , stress echocardiography , head (geology) , cardiology , biology , coronary artery disease , paleontology
Background: This study was a head‐to‐head, intraindividual comparison of the diagnostic accuracy and side effect profile of bolus and infusion administration of adenosine for stress myocardial contrast echocardiography (MCE). Methods: Adenosine MCE was performed in 64 subjects, referred for stress thallium‐201 single‐photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) for known or suspected CAD. Each patient received adenosine by multiple boluses (6–12 mg/bolus) and infusion (140 μg/kg per min for 6 min) forms in random order, given at least 20 minutes apart. Results: No prolonged or serious adverse events occurred during either adenosine bolus or infusion. Compared to SPECT imaging, the sensitivity, specificity, and concordance for the diagnosis of CAD were 77%, 87%, and 82% for adenosine infusion MCE and 81%, 90%, and 86% for adenosine bolus MCE, respectively. Conclusions: Both adenosine infusion and adenosine bolus protocols are safe for MCE in humans and can be used for the diagnosis of CAD.