论文部分内容阅读
目的比较经冠状动脉超声心肌声学造影(MCE)与校正的心肌梗死溶栓临床试验(TIMI)帧数计数(CTFC)及冠状动脉血流速度方法对经皮冠状动脉介入术(PCI)后心肌灌注的评价,并探讨相关临床意义。方法68例住院患者根据选择性冠状动脉造影结果,按血管狭窄程度分组A组,正常对照组;B组,血管狭窄75%~95%;C组,血管狭窄>95%;D组,急性血管闭塞。对各病变血管均进行PCI治疗,并恢复TIMI3级血流。采用定量经冠状动脉MCE、CTFC及冠状动脉血流速度方法对术后心肌灌注状况进行检测。其中,经冠状动脉MCE有关定量参数分别为造影剂峰值密度(A)反映心肌血容量;峰值时间(TP)反映心肌灌注速度;曲线下面积(AUC)反映心肌血流量。结果PCI后心外膜血管恢复正常血流的前提下,各狭窄病变血管组CTFC与对照组差异无统计学意义;而闭塞血管组冠状动脉血流速度较对照组低;在MCE检测中,C组的心肌血容量及血流量较对照组低,而D组反映心肌灌注的3个参数值均较对照组差异均有统计学意义。结论经冠状动脉MCE通过多个参数进行定量分析,较其他两种方法能更精确地评价PCI后心肌灌注状况。
Objective To compare the effect of percutaneous transluminal coronary angiography (MCE) and corrected myocardial infarction thrombolysis trial (TIMI) frame count (CTFC) and coronary flow velocity on myocardial perfusion after percutaneous coronary intervention Evaluation, and explore the relevant clinical significance. Methods Sixty-eight inpatients were divided into group A and group B according to the results of selective coronary angiography. Group B received stenosis of 75% -95%. Group C received stenosis of 95%. Group D received acute coronary angiography Blocked. Peripheral blood vessels were treated with PCI and restored TIMI3 grade blood flow. Quantitative measurement of postoperative myocardial perfusion by quantitative coronary flow MCE, CTFC and coronary flow velocity method. Among them, the quantitative parameters of coronary artery MCE were the peak density of contrast medium (A), which reflected the myocardial blood volume; the peak time (TP) reflected the myocardial perfusion rate; the area under the curve (AUC) reflected the myocardial blood flow. Results Under the premise of epicardial blood vessels returning to normal blood flow after PCI, there was no significant difference between the control group and the CTFC of the stenotic vascular group, while the coronary blood flow velocity of the occluded group was lower than that of the control group. In the MCE test, C Group of myocardial blood volume and blood flow lower than the control group, while group D reflect the three parameters of myocardial perfusion compared with the control group differences were statistically significant. Conclusions Quantitative analysis of MCE through multiple parameters of coronary artery can evaluate myocardial perfusion more accurately than the other two methods.