Cargando…
Comparison Between Invasive and Noninvasive Methods to Estimate Subendocardial Oxygen Supply and Demand Imbalance
BACKGROUND: Estimation of the balance between subendocardial oxygen supply and demand could be a useful parameter to assess the risk of myocardial ischemia. Evaluation of the subendocardial viability ratio (SEVR, also known as Buckberg index) by invasive recording of left ventricular and aortic pres...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8649295/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34465133 http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.121.021207 |
_version_ | 1784610965095972864 |
---|---|
author | Salvi, Paolo Baldi, Corrado Scalise, Filippo Grillo, Andrea Salvi, Lucia Tan, Isabella De Censi, Lorenzo Sorropago, Antonio Moretti, Francesco Sorropago, Giovanni Gao, Lan Rovina, Matteo Simon, Giulia Fabris, Bruno Carretta, Renzo Avolio, Alberto P. Parati, Gianfranco |
author_facet | Salvi, Paolo Baldi, Corrado Scalise, Filippo Grillo, Andrea Salvi, Lucia Tan, Isabella De Censi, Lorenzo Sorropago, Antonio Moretti, Francesco Sorropago, Giovanni Gao, Lan Rovina, Matteo Simon, Giulia Fabris, Bruno Carretta, Renzo Avolio, Alberto P. Parati, Gianfranco |
author_sort | Salvi, Paolo |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Estimation of the balance between subendocardial oxygen supply and demand could be a useful parameter to assess the risk of myocardial ischemia. Evaluation of the subendocardial viability ratio (SEVR, also known as Buckberg index) by invasive recording of left ventricular and aortic pressure curves represents a valid method to estimate the degree of myocardial perfusion relative to left ventricular workload. However, routine clinical use of this parameter requires its noninvasive estimation and the demonstration of its reliability. METHODS AND RESULTS: Arterial applanation tonometry allows a noninvasive estimation of SEVR as the ratio of the areas directly beneath the central aortic pressure curves obtained during diastole (myocardial oxygen supply) and during systole (myocardial oxygen demand). However, this “traditional” method does not account for the intra‐ventricular diastolic pressure and proper allocation to systole and diastole of left ventricular isometric contraction and relaxation, respectively, resulting in an overestimation of the SEVR values. These issues are considered in the novel method for SEVR assessment tested in this study. SEVR values estimated with carotid tonometry by "traditional” and "new” method were compared with those evaluated invasively by cardiac catheterization. The “traditional” method provided significantly higher SEVR values than the reference invasive SEVR: average of differences±SD= 44±11% (limits of agreement: 23% – 65%). The noninvasive “new” method showed a much better agreement with the invasive determination of SEVR: average of differences±SD= 0±8% (limits of agreement: ‐15% to 16%). CONCLUSIONS: Carotid applanation tonometry provides valid noninvasive SEVR values only when all the main factors determining myocardial supply and demand flow are considered. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8649295 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-86492952022-01-14 Comparison Between Invasive and Noninvasive Methods to Estimate Subendocardial Oxygen Supply and Demand Imbalance Salvi, Paolo Baldi, Corrado Scalise, Filippo Grillo, Andrea Salvi, Lucia Tan, Isabella De Censi, Lorenzo Sorropago, Antonio Moretti, Francesco Sorropago, Giovanni Gao, Lan Rovina, Matteo Simon, Giulia Fabris, Bruno Carretta, Renzo Avolio, Alberto P. Parati, Gianfranco J Am Heart Assoc Original Research BACKGROUND: Estimation of the balance between subendocardial oxygen supply and demand could be a useful parameter to assess the risk of myocardial ischemia. Evaluation of the subendocardial viability ratio (SEVR, also known as Buckberg index) by invasive recording of left ventricular and aortic pressure curves represents a valid method to estimate the degree of myocardial perfusion relative to left ventricular workload. However, routine clinical use of this parameter requires its noninvasive estimation and the demonstration of its reliability. METHODS AND RESULTS: Arterial applanation tonometry allows a noninvasive estimation of SEVR as the ratio of the areas directly beneath the central aortic pressure curves obtained during diastole (myocardial oxygen supply) and during systole (myocardial oxygen demand). However, this “traditional” method does not account for the intra‐ventricular diastolic pressure and proper allocation to systole and diastole of left ventricular isometric contraction and relaxation, respectively, resulting in an overestimation of the SEVR values. These issues are considered in the novel method for SEVR assessment tested in this study. SEVR values estimated with carotid tonometry by "traditional” and "new” method were compared with those evaluated invasively by cardiac catheterization. The “traditional” method provided significantly higher SEVR values than the reference invasive SEVR: average of differences±SD= 44±11% (limits of agreement: 23% – 65%). The noninvasive “new” method showed a much better agreement with the invasive determination of SEVR: average of differences±SD= 0±8% (limits of agreement: ‐15% to 16%). CONCLUSIONS: Carotid applanation tonometry provides valid noninvasive SEVR values only when all the main factors determining myocardial supply and demand flow are considered. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-09-01 /pmc/articles/PMC8649295/ /pubmed/34465133 http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.121.021207 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Published on behalf of the American Heart Association, Inc., by Wiley. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made. |
spellingShingle | Original Research Salvi, Paolo Baldi, Corrado Scalise, Filippo Grillo, Andrea Salvi, Lucia Tan, Isabella De Censi, Lorenzo Sorropago, Antonio Moretti, Francesco Sorropago, Giovanni Gao, Lan Rovina, Matteo Simon, Giulia Fabris, Bruno Carretta, Renzo Avolio, Alberto P. Parati, Gianfranco Comparison Between Invasive and Noninvasive Methods to Estimate Subendocardial Oxygen Supply and Demand Imbalance |
title | Comparison Between Invasive and Noninvasive Methods to Estimate Subendocardial Oxygen Supply and Demand Imbalance |
title_full | Comparison Between Invasive and Noninvasive Methods to Estimate Subendocardial Oxygen Supply and Demand Imbalance |
title_fullStr | Comparison Between Invasive and Noninvasive Methods to Estimate Subendocardial Oxygen Supply and Demand Imbalance |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison Between Invasive and Noninvasive Methods to Estimate Subendocardial Oxygen Supply and Demand Imbalance |
title_short | Comparison Between Invasive and Noninvasive Methods to Estimate Subendocardial Oxygen Supply and Demand Imbalance |
title_sort | comparison between invasive and noninvasive methods to estimate subendocardial oxygen supply and demand imbalance |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8649295/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34465133 http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.121.021207 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT salvipaolo comparisonbetweeninvasiveandnoninvasivemethodstoestimatesubendocardialoxygensupplyanddemandimbalance AT baldicorrado comparisonbetweeninvasiveandnoninvasivemethodstoestimatesubendocardialoxygensupplyanddemandimbalance AT scalisefilippo comparisonbetweeninvasiveandnoninvasivemethodstoestimatesubendocardialoxygensupplyanddemandimbalance AT grilloandrea comparisonbetweeninvasiveandnoninvasivemethodstoestimatesubendocardialoxygensupplyanddemandimbalance AT salvilucia comparisonbetweeninvasiveandnoninvasivemethodstoestimatesubendocardialoxygensupplyanddemandimbalance AT tanisabella comparisonbetweeninvasiveandnoninvasivemethodstoestimatesubendocardialoxygensupplyanddemandimbalance AT decensilorenzo comparisonbetweeninvasiveandnoninvasivemethodstoestimatesubendocardialoxygensupplyanddemandimbalance AT sorropagoantonio comparisonbetweeninvasiveandnoninvasivemethodstoestimatesubendocardialoxygensupplyanddemandimbalance AT morettifrancesco comparisonbetweeninvasiveandnoninvasivemethodstoestimatesubendocardialoxygensupplyanddemandimbalance AT sorropagogiovanni comparisonbetweeninvasiveandnoninvasivemethodstoestimatesubendocardialoxygensupplyanddemandimbalance AT gaolan comparisonbetweeninvasiveandnoninvasivemethodstoestimatesubendocardialoxygensupplyanddemandimbalance AT rovinamatteo comparisonbetweeninvasiveandnoninvasivemethodstoestimatesubendocardialoxygensupplyanddemandimbalance AT simongiulia comparisonbetweeninvasiveandnoninvasivemethodstoestimatesubendocardialoxygensupplyanddemandimbalance AT fabrisbruno comparisonbetweeninvasiveandnoninvasivemethodstoestimatesubendocardialoxygensupplyanddemandimbalance AT carrettarenzo comparisonbetweeninvasiveandnoninvasivemethodstoestimatesubendocardialoxygensupplyanddemandimbalance AT avolioalbertop comparisonbetweeninvasiveandnoninvasivemethodstoestimatesubendocardialoxygensupplyanddemandimbalance AT paratigianfranco comparisonbetweeninvasiveandnoninvasivemethodstoestimatesubendocardialoxygensupplyanddemandimbalance |