Evaluation and Optimization of Real-Time Perfusion Imaging Using Multiple Ultrasound Systems With Imagify Microspheres

Abstract

Current commercially available ultrasound systems have proprietary contrast-specific imaging modes to evaluate myocardial contrast enhancement (MCE). Each of these modes uses a different pulsing scheme and has unique system terminology and a proprietary name. The aim of this study was to determine optimal system settings and MCE duration using Imagify (perflubutane polymer microspheres), a new ultrasound imaging agent undergoing development for perfusion stress echocardiography to detect coronary artery disease. Thirty-nine patients were enrolled. Four ultrasound systems with real-time, low mechanical index (nonlinear, multi-pulse) modes were evaluated. Optimal MCE settings were determined qualitatively in the apical views through systematic adjustment of multiple settings while maintaining a frame rate consistent with stress echocardiography to produce high-intensity (bright-hyperechoic), transmural myocardial enhancement. When using the clinical dose of Imagify during real-time imaging, the optimized settings for three ultrasound systems allowed prolonged, clinically useful MCE with a mean duration of 9.5 minutes.

Keywords

echocardiography myocardial perfusion imaging microsphere real-time imaging myocardial contrast enhancement Imagify

References

Baghdasarian SB , Heller GV : The role of myocardial perfusion imaging in the diagnosis of patients with coronary artery disease: developments over the past year. Curr Opin Cardiol 2005 ;20:369-374.

Senior R. , Monaghan M. , Becher H. , Mayet J. , Nihoyannopoulos P. : Stress echocardiography for the diagnosis and risk stratification of patients with suspected or known coronary artery disease: a critical appraisal . Heart 2005;91:427-436.

Thompson RC , Cullom SJ : Issues regarding radiation dosage of cardiac nuclear and radiography procedures . J Nucl Cardiol 2006;13:19-23.

Cuocolo A. , Acampa W. , Imbriaco M. , De LN , Iovino GL , Salvatore M. : The many ways to myocardial perfusion imaging. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2005;49:4-18.

Merz CN , Berman DS : Imaging techniques for coronary artery disease: current status and future directions. Clin Cardiol 1997;20:526-532.

Bierig SM , Herrmann SC : Feasibility of performing real-time myocardial contrast echocardiography during clinical dobutamine stress echocardiography in technically difficult patients . J Diagn Med Ultrasound 2002;18:18-22.

Dijkmans PA , Senior R. , Becher H. , et al: Myocardial contrast echocardiography evolving as a clinically feasible technique for accurate, rapid, and safe assessment of myocardial perfusion: the evidence so far. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006;48:2168-2177.

Wei K. , Tong KL , Belcik T. , et al: Detection of coronary stenoses at rest with myocardial contrast echocardiography. Circulation 2005;112:1154-1160.

Senior R. : Imagify (perflubutane polymer microspheres) injectable suspension for the assessment of coronary artery disease. Expert Rev Cardiovasc Ther 2007;5:413-421.

10.

Senior R. , Zabalgoitia M. , Monaghan M. , et al: Accurate detection of coronary artery disease by echocardiography using perflubutane polymer microspheres, a novel contrast agent: comparison with nuclear perfusion imaging in two phase three multicenter clinical trials [abstract 2479]. Circulation 2008;116:546.

11.

Bhatia VK , Senior R. : Contrast echocardiography: evidence for clinical use. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 2008; 21:409-416.

12.

Schutt EG , Klein DH , Mattrey RM , Riess JG : Injectable microbubbles as contrast agents for diagnostic ultrasound imaging: the key role of perfluorochemicals. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl 2003;42:3218-3235.

13.

Chomas JE , Dayton P. , Allen J. , Morgan K. , Ferrara KW : Mechanisms of contrast agent destruction. IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control 2001;48:232-248.

14.

Masugata H. , Lafitte S. , Peters B. , Strachan GM , DeMaria AN : Comparison of real-time and intermittent triggered myocardial contrast echocardiography for quantification of coronary stenosis severity and transmural perfusion gradient. Circulation 2001;104:1550-1556.

15.

Moir S. , Haluska BA , Jenkins C. , Fathi R. , Marwick TH : Incremental benefit of myocardial contrast to combined dipyridamole-exercise stress echocardiography for the assessment of coronary artery disease. Circulation 2004;110:1108-1113.

16.

Becher H. , Burns PN : Handbook of Contrast Echocardiography: LV Function and Myocardial Perfusion . New York, Springer-Verlag , 2000.

17.

Zamorano JL , Fernandez MAG : Contrast Echocardiography in Clinical Practice. Milan, Italy, Springer, 2004.

18.

Jayaweera AR , Wei K. , Coggins M. , Bin JP , Goodman C. , Kaul S. : Role of capillaries in determining CBF reserve: new insights using myocardial contrast echocardiography . Am J Physiol 1999;277(pt 2):H2363-H2372.

19.

Straub JA , Chickering DE , Church CC , Shah B. , Hanlon T. , Bernstein H. : Porous PLGA microparticles: AI-700, an intravenously administered ultrasound contrast agent for use in echocardiography. J Control Release 2005;108:21-32.