Why the study?
Does successful coronary stenting resolve reversible perfusion defects on Thallium-201 myocardial imaging in patients undergoing complete revascularization?
Does successful coronary stenting resolve reversible perfusion defects on Thallium-201 myocardial imaging in patients undergoing complete revascularization?
Reversible perfusion defects can persist in approximately one-third of patients soon after angiographically successful coronary stenting, particularly in those with longer disease duration and collateral vessels, without indicating acute unfavorable outcomes.
Persistent defects after successful stenting should not yet change management; leaves open their prognostic impact and need for targeted trials.
To evaluate the clinical significance of reversible perfusion defects that were observed soon after the successful deployment of a coronary stent, 47 patients underwent thallium-201 myocardial scintigraphy and radionuclide angiography in conjunction with adenosine-induced coronary hyperemia before and after complete revascularization. Coronary angiography showed a significant decrease in the percent diameter stenosis (from 87+/-11% before stenting to -1+/-5% after stenting, p<0.01) with no major dissection, residual stenosis, or intra-stent formation of thrombus. Even after the angiographically successful procedure, reversible perfusion defects were present in 17 (36%) of the 47 patients, none of whom showed any wall motion abnormalities during the infusion of adenosine. Disease duration was significantly longer and collateral vessels were more common in the patients with than in those without thallium redistribution, whereas the other clinical, pre- and post-stent angiographic and hemodynamic factors were similar. In conclusion, reversible perfusion defects without wall motion abnormalities were demonstrated during the infusion of adenosine in approximately one-third of patients soon after coronary stenting, and were not consistently related to acute unfavorable outcomes of stent placement.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nagaoka et al. (1998) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: