These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Are high doses of intracoronary adenosine an alternative to standard intravenous adenosine for the assessment of fractional flow reserve?
    Author: Casella G, Leibig M, Schiele TM, Schrepf R, Seelig V, Stempfle HU, Erdin P, Rieber J, König A, Siebert U, Klauss V.
    Journal: Am Heart J; 2004 Oct; 148(4):590-5. PubMed ID: 15459587.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: Achievement of maximal hyperemia of the coronary microcirculation is a prerequisite for the measurement of fractional flow reserve (FFR). Intravenous adenosine is considered the standard method, but its use in the catheterization laboratory is time consuming and expensive compared with intracoronary adenosine. Therefore, this study compared different high, intracoronary doses of adenosine for the potential to achieve a maximal hyperemia equivalent to the standard intravenous route. METHODS: FFR was assessed in 50 patients with 50 intermediate lesions during cardiac catheterization. FFR was calculated as the ratio of the distal coronary pressure to the aortic pressure at hyperemia. Different incremental doses of intracoronary adenosine (60, 90, 120, and 150 microg as boli) and a standard intravenous infusion of 140 microg/kg/min were administered in a randomized fashion. RESULTS: Different incremental doses of intracoronary adenosine were well tolerated, with fewer systemic adverse effects than intravenous adenosine. At baseline, there were no significant differences for mean aortic and distal coronary pressure or heart rate in the different adenosine doses and routes. FFR decreased with increasing adenosine doses, with the lowest values observed with the 150-microg intracoronary bolus and 140-microg/kg/min dose of intravenous adenosine. All intracoronary doses, except the 150-microg bolus, resulted in mean FFR values that were significantly (P <.05) higher than FFR after the administration intravenous adenosine. Furthermore, 5 patients (10%) with a FFR value >0.75 and 3 subjects (6%) with a FFR value >0.80 who received a 60-microg intracoronary bolus reached a value below the cutoff point of 0.75 with the intravenous administration. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests a dose-response relationship on hyperemia for intracoronary adenosine doses >60 microg. The administration of very high intracoronary adenosine boli is safe and associated with fewer systemic adverse effects than standard intravenous adenosine. However, intravenous adenosine administration with 140 microg/kg/min produced a more pronounced hyperemia than intracoronary adenosine in most patients and should be the preferred mode of application for the assessment of FFR.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]