Usefulness of quantitative intravenous myocardial contrast echocardiography to analyze microvasculature perfusion in patients with a recent myocardial infarction and an open infarct-related artery: comparison with intracoronary myocardial contrast echocardiography.

AIMS We analyzed the usefulness of quantitative intravenous myocardial contrast echocardiography to study microvasculature perfusion after infarction in comparison with intracoronary myocardial contrast echocardiography. METHODS AND RESULTS Thirty-two patients with a first ST elevation myocardial infarction, single-vessel disease and an open artery (TIMI 3) were studied before discharge. Myocardial perfusion in the risk area was quantified with intracoronary and intravenous myocardial contrast echocardiography. Perfusion was normal (intracoronary contrast echocardiography normalized videointensity >0.75) in 78 out of 97 dysfunctional segments (80%). Sensitivity and specificity of intravenous contrast echocardiography to predict normal perfusion were 87% and 63% for 'first-pass myocardial blood flow' (upslope of contrast arrival x peak intensity after intravenous bolus injection of contrast) and 91% and 89% for end-systolic single-triggered images captured every 6 cycles, respectively. In an analysis per patients, normal perfusion (0 or 1 hypoperfused segments with intracoronary contrast echocardiography) was observed in 22 cases (69%). End-systolic single-triggered images showed a strong correlation with intracoronary contrast echocardiography (R2 = 0.82, p = 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS Intravenous contrast echocardiography is a useful technique to analyze microvasculature perfusion soon after infarction. A quantitative analysis of single-triggered images is an easy-to-obtain and reliable method to define perfusion when compared with intracoronary contrast echocardiography.