Key result
Low-dose dobutamine stress echocardiography accurately predicted late left ventricular functional recovery after AMI (90% accuracy), while myocardial contrast echocardiography had 68% accuracy.
Why the study?
Do low-dose dobutamine stress echocardiography and myocardial contrast echocardiography predict left ventricular functional recovery in patients with acute myocardial infarction treated with successful thrombolysis?
Population
50 patients with acute myocardial infarction treated with successful thrombolysis
Design
Cohort
Follow-up
6 months
Authors
Loading...
LDDE may better predict post-AMI LV recovery than MCE; hypothesis-generating and requires prospective validation before practice change.
Cohort (n=50)
Do low-dose dobutamine stress echocardiography and myocardial contrast echocardiography predict left ventricular functional recovery in patients with acute myocardial infarction treated with successful thrombolysis?
Absolute Event Rate: 90% vs 68%
Low-dose dobutamine stress echocardiography accurately predicts late left ventricular function recovery after AMI, while myocardial contrast echocardiography provides high sensitivity and negative predictive value.
Sbano et al. (2005) conducted a cohort in Acute myocardial infarction (n=50). Low-dose dobutamine stress echocardiography (LDDE) vs. Myocardial contrast echocardiography (MCE) was evaluated on Left ventricular functional recovery (absolute ≥5% increase in ejection fraction at 6 months). Low-dose dobutamine stress echocardiography accurately predicted late left ventricular functional recovery after AMI (90% accuracy), while myocardial contrast echocardiography had 68% accuracy.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: