Percutaneous endomyocardial injection resulted in 43% ± 15% microsphere retention compared with 15% ± 21% for open chest epicardial injection (P<0.01), with smaller volumes improving retention.
Does percutaneous endomyocardial injection improve myocardial retention of injected agents compared to epicardial injection in a porcine model?
Catheter-based endomyocardial injection provides superior local retention of injected agents compared to open-chest epicardial injection, with smaller volumes improving retention.
Absolute Event Rate: 43% vs 15%
p-value: p=<0.01
Direct intramyocardial injection may permit local delivery of protein and gene therapy agents for myocardial and coronary artery disease. Little is known about the immediate fate of materials administered via percutaneous endomyocardial catheters or via surgical epicardial injection. In this study, we use a novel method to evaluate the acute retention of agents injected directly into the myocardium, compare epicardial with the percutaneous endocardial and postmortem delivery, and evaluate the influence of injectate volume on myocardial retention. Fifteen 40-50 kg pigs underwent overlapping myocardial injections using a percutaneous endomyocardial catheter, an epicardial needle via an open chest, and epicardial needle postmortem. Multiple distinct 15 micro neutron-activated microsphere species were used as tracers. Two or three myocardial walls were injected in each animal using 3.5 mm, 27-28 gauge needles at varying injectate volumes. Animals were sacrificed immediately. Myocardial walls were divided and multiple microsphere species were quantified. In an additional study, nine 70 kg pigs underwent percutaneous endomyocardial injections with replication-deficient adenovirus encoding for the production of lac-Z. The injectate volume was varied, while the viral particle number remained constant. The animals were sacrificed 5 days after the percutaneous injections; the heart, liver, and spleen were collected for beta-galactosidase activity. Endomyocardial injection was associated with 43% +/- 15% microsphere retention, compared with 15% +/- 21% (P < 0.01) retention of open chest epicardial injection and 89% +/- 60% (P < 0.01) for postmortem injection. Reducing the injectate volume from 100 to 10 microL improved microsphere retention (P = 0.01). There was a trend toward improved viral transfection associated with smaller injection volumes. Despite direct intramyocardial administration, a significant fraction of injectate is not retained locally. Catheter-based needle endomyocardial injection is associated with equivalent or superior injectate retention compared with open chest epicardial injection. Proportionately, more injectate may be retained at lower volumes. Loss may involve a combination of channel leakage, venous, and lymphatic return.
Grossman et al. (Thu,) conducted a other in Myocardial and coronary artery disease (n=24). Percutaneous endomyocardial injection vs. Open chest epicardial injection was evaluated on Microsphere retention (p=<0.01). Percutaneous endomyocardial injection resulted in 43% ± 15% microsphere retention compared with 15% ± 21% for open chest epicardial injection (P<0.01), with smaller volumes improving retention.