Contrast echocardiography clarifies uninterpretable wall motion in intensive care unit patients

Navigating the Waves of Critical Care Echocardiography: Unveiling its Role, Advantages, and Pitfalls in the Cardiac Intensive Care Unit

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Critical Care Echocardiography (CCE) is now established as an important tool in the intensive care unit (ICU). This paper aims to examine the expanding role of cardiovascular ultrasound in the ICU, focusing on its applications, benefits, and challenges, while highlighting recent advancements shaping the future of critical care echocardiography.

RECENT FINDINGS

Non-invasive echocardiographic measurement of hemodynamic parameters including stroke volume, cardiac output, left ventricular filling pressures, and pulmonary pressures have been well-validated against invasive measurements. Myocardial perfusion can also be evaluated using ultrasound enhancing agent techniques to further risk-stratify patients with chest pain. Echocardiography enables clinicians to visualize cardiac anatomy and physiology directly at the bedside, providing immediate feedback in rapidly changing clinical situations. Assessment of stroke volume, cardiac output, and left ventricular filling pressures can be readily measured at the bedside and correspond with clinical outcomes including mortality. Measurement of central venous pressure and pulmonary pressures may guide clinical decisions in fluid management and mechanical ventilation strategies. Lastly, myocardial perfusion imaging can supplement the 2D echocardiographic evaluation to further risk-stratify patients presenting with chest pain.

Echocardiographic image quality deteriorates with the severity of cardiogenic shock

BACKGROUND

Transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) is the primary tool for assessing left ventricular (LV) function in cardiogenic shock (CS). However, inadequate image quality often hinders it. In this retrospective study, we investigated factors associated with LV image quality in patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) with ischemic CS.

RESULTS

Two critical care physicians accredited in echocardiography independently reviewed the TTEs of 100 patients admitted to our tertiary cardiac ICU with ST-elevation myocardial infarction complicated by CS between October 2016 and September 2019. Endocardial border definition (EBD) was graded for each myocardial segment of the apical 4-chamber and 2-chamber views using a conventional scoring system (1 = good, 2 = suboptimal, 3 = poor, and 4 = not possible). The biplane EBD index (EBDi) was calculated by averaging all segments from both views. An average EBDi of both observers was correlated with clinical and echocardiographic parameters. The median age was 62 years [54, 73], and 78% were males. LV ejection fraction and cardiac index (CI) medians were 29% [20, 35] and 1.93 l/min/m2 [1.40, 2.51], respectively. The median biplane EBDi was nearly suboptimal (1.833 [1.542, 2.083]). There was no correlation between EBDi and age, sex, or body mass index. However, biplane EBDi demonstrated statistically significant correlations with PaO2 (r2 = 0.066, p = 0.01), mean arterial pressure (MAP, r2 = 0.055, p = 0.03), CI (r2 = 0.105, p < 0.01), tricuspid annulus systolic velocity (RV S', r2 = 0.092, p = 0.01), and tricuspid regurge maximum velocity (TR Vmax, r2 = 0.067, p = 0.01). In a multivariate model, only CI correlated independently with EBDi (r2 = 0.105, p < 0.01). The biplane EBDi predicted CI (area under the curve (AUC) 0.70, p = 0.001) with good sensitivity (71%) and reasonable specificity (61%).

CONCLUSIONS

The study suggests that in patients admitted to the ICU with ischemic CS, LV image quality by TTE deteriorates with the severity of shock, as indicated by CI.

Taking the time to get it bright: Use of ultrasound enhancing agent redirects clinical course of an unstable patient

The use of ultrasound enhancing agents (UEA) during echocardiography helps to optimize visualization in technically difficult studies, with improved left ventricular opacification and endocardial border definition. The use of these agents may often unveil critical data that drastically alter clinical decision making. Despite the potential clinical benefits of UEA and known safety data, clinicians are still sometimes reluctant to take the time to use UEAs in unstable patients. Herein, we demonstrate a challenging case of a patient with late presentation myocardial infarction, complicated with cardiogenic shock and pseudoaneurysm formation that was not observed in non-contrast images, emblematically demonstrating the value of UEA in selected patients. <Learning objective: Ultrasound enhancing agents (UEAs) improve left ventricular opacification and endocardial border definition during echocardiography and can be used in a wide variety of different clinical settings. Despite the known clinical benefits of these agents and established safety data, clinicians are still sometimes reluctant to take the time to use UEAs in unstable patients. We demonstrate a case where the use of UEAs completely transformed clinical decision making.>.

Standard echocardiography versus very-low mechanical index contrast-imaging: left ventricle volumes and ejection fraction multi-reader variability and reference values in a subgroup with no risk factors or cardiac disease

We retrospectively assessed the rest-phase images of 300 contrast stress- echocardiograms, during which very-low mechanical index (VLMI) imaging with ultrasound enhancing agents (UEAs) was routinely acquired in addition to greyscale echocardiography; intra- and inter-reader variability for left ventricle (LV) volumes and ejection fraction (LVEF) at rest was established in the overall cohort and normal values were calculated in the subset of subjects with no cardiac risk factors or cardiac disease and a normal stress-echocardiogram. Current recommendations for chamber quantification using echocardiography advise the use of UEAs in case of insufficient quality of endocardial visualization, but normal values for LV volumes and LVEF using UEAs have never been published using currently recommended VLMI method. Single-centre retrospective study, enrolling subjects referred to contrast stress- echocardiography for suspect coronary artery disease, including the acquisition of both standard 2D greyscale and bolus UEAs with VLMI, regardless of the image quality. This enables offline measurement of the LV volumes and LVEF for both greyscale and UEAs-VLMI images at rest in all subjects. Images were allocated to 3 readers in random order. Normal range for LV volumes and LVEF was also derived in a subset of apparently healthy subjects. In the 298 exams finally assessed, measurement variability among the three readers was lower with UEAs-VLMI, in particular for end-systolic volumes (intra-class correlation coefficient for concordance improved from 0.855 to 0.916, for LVEF from 0.68 to 0.783, p < 0.01), intra- observer variability reduced (Lin's correlation coefficient for LVEF from 0.747 to 0.857, p < 0.01). Normal mean indexed LV end-diastolic volume with UEAs-VLMI, compared to greyscale imaging, was + 14 ml/m², while LVEF was + 5 to + 6% points. This is the largest study specifically addressing UEAs-VLMI imaging and comparing data with standard greyscale imaging; it demonstrates a reduction in measurement variability of LV volumes and LVEF. Normal reference values for VLMI ultrasound are reported for the first time in comparison with greyscale values.

Echocardiographic assessment of myocardial function and mechanics during veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation

BACKGROUND

Transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) plays a fundamental role in the management of patients supported with extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). In light of fluctuating clinical states, serial monitoring of cardiac function is required. Formal quantification of ventricular parameters and myocardial mechanics offer benefit over qualitative assessment. The aim of this research was to compare unenhanced (UE) versus contrast-enhanced (CE) quantification of myocardial function and mechanics during ECMO in a validated ovine model.

METHODS

Twenty-four sheep were commenced on peripheral veno-venous ECMO. Acute smoke-induced lung injury was induced in 21 sheep (3 controls). CE-TTE with Definity using Cadence Pulse Sequencing was performed. Two readers performed image analysis with TomTec Arena. End diastolic area (EDA, cm2), end systolic area (ESA, cm2), fractional area change (FAC, %), endocardial global circumferential strain (EGCS, %), myocardial global circumferential strain (MGCS, %), endocardial rotation (ER, degrees) and global radial strain (GRD, %) were evaluated for UE-TTE and CE-TTE.

RESULTS

Full data sets are available in 22 sheep (92%). Mean CE EDA and ESA were significantly larger than in unenhanced images. Mean FAC was almost identical between the two techniques. There was no significant difference between UE and CE EGCS, MGCS and ER. There was significant difference in GRS between imaging techniques. Unenhanced inter-observer variability was from 0.48-0.70 but significantly improved to 0.71-0.89 for contrast imaging in all echocardiographic parameters.

CONCLUSION

Semi-automated methods of myocardial function and mechanics using CE-TTE during ECMO was feasible and similar to UE-TTE for all parameters except ventricular areas and global radial strain. Addition of contrast significantly decreased inter-observer variability of all measurements.

Clinical practice of contrast echocardiography: recommendation by the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging (EACVI) 2017

Contrast echocardiography is widely used in cardiology. It is applied to improve image quality, reader confidence and reproducibility both for assessing left ventricular (LV) structure and function at rest and for assessing global and regional function in stress echocardiography. The use of contrast in echocardiography has now extended beyond cardiac structure and function assessment to evaluation of perfusion both of the myocardium and of the intracardiac structures. Safety of contrast agents have now been addressed in large patient population and these studies clearly established its excellent safety profile. This document, based on clinical trials, randomized and multicentre studies and published clinical experience, has established clear recommendations for the use of contrast in various clinical conditions with evidence-based protocols.

Emergency and critical care applications for contrast-enhanced ultrasound

INTRODUCTION

Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) using intravascular microbubbles has potential to revolutionize point-of-care ultrasonography by expanding the use of ultrasonography into clinical scenarios previously reserved for computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging, or angiography.

METHODS

We performed a literature search and report clinical experience to provide an introduction to CEUS and describe its current applications for point-of-care indications.

RESULTS

The uses of CEUS include several applications highly relevant for emergency medicine, such as solid-organ injuries, actively bleeding hematomas, or abdominal aortic aneurysms. Compared with CT as the preeminent advanced imaging modality in the emergency department, CEUS is low cost, radiation sparing, repeatable, and readily available. It does not require sedation, preprocedural laboratory assessment, or transportation to the radiology suite.

CONCLUSIONS

CEUS is a promising imaging technique for point-of-care applications in pediatric and adult patients and can be applied for patients with allergy to CT contrast medium or with impaired renal function. More high-quality CEUS research focusing on accuracy, patient safety, health care costs, and throughput times is needed to validate its use in emergency and critical care settings.

Basic and advanced echocardiographic evaluation of myocardial dysfunction in sepsis and septic shock

Sepsis continues to be a leading cause of mortality and morbidity in the intensive care unit. Cardiovascular dysfunction in sepsis is associated with worse short- and long-term outcomes. Sepsis-related myocardial dysfunction is noted in 20%-65% of these patients and manifests as isolated or combined left or right ventricular systolic or diastolic dysfunction. Echocardiography is the most commonly used modality for the diagnosis of sepsis-related myocardial dysfunction. With the increasing use of ultrasonography in the intensive care unit, there is a renewed interest in sepsis-related myocardial dysfunction. This review summarises the current scope of literature focused on sepsis-related myocardial dysfunction and highlights the use of basic and advanced echocardiographic techniques for the diagnosis of sepsis-related myocardial dysfunction and the management of sepsis and septic shock.

Contrast echocardiography in daily clinical practice

Ultrasound contrast agents have unique acoustic properties that enable them to enhance the cardiac blood flow and thus are used broadly in modern echocardiography laboratories for salvage of nondiagnostic studies, improving accuracy and reducing variability even in the presence of adequate image quality. Contrast echocardiography is also used as an adjunctive technique when unenhanced echocardiography falls short in the differentiation of cardiac structural abnormalities such as cardiac masses. Ultrasound contrast agents are pure intravascular tracers. Development of innovative ultrasound imaging techniques has led to myocardial perfusion imaging with contrast echocardiography. Although currently an off-label indication, it has been shown that perfusion imaging with contrast echocardiography adds incremental value to stress echocardiography in the detection of coronary artery disease. Moreover, it can be used for assessment of myocardial viability. In this paper we briefly discuss the basics of contrast echocardiography and its use in daily clinical practice.

Safety With Echocardiographic Contrast Agents

In October 2007, the Food and Drug Administration mandated significant revisions to product labeling for the commercially available echocardiographic contrast agents (ECA) Definity and Optison after spontaneous healthcare provider reports of 4 patient deaths and ≈190 severe cardiopulmonary reactions occurring in close temporal relationship to ECA administration. Since then, multiple large ECA safety studies have been published and have included outpatients, hospitalized patients (including the critically ill), patients undergoing stress echocardiography, and patients with pulmonary hypertension. In addition, the Food and Drug Administration has convened 2 Advisory Committee meetings and the product labels for Optison and Definity have been substantially revised with a softening of safety restrictions. In this review, we will address the safety of ECA use in patients with serious cardiopulmonary conditions, patients with intracardiac shunts, and special patient populations including pulmonary hypertension, pediatrics, and pregnancy. In addition, we will discuss the confounding role of pseudocomplication in attribution of adverse events during diagnostic testing, the current status of the ECA Black Box Warning, and recommended safety precautions during ECA administration.

Impact of Contrast Echocardiography on Assessment of Ventricular Function and Clinical Diagnosis in Routine Clinical Echocardiography: Korean Multicenter Study

Background

Fundamental echocardiography has some drawbacks in patients with difficult-to-image echocardiograms. The aim of this study is to evaluate impact of contrast echocardiography (CE) on ventricular function assessment and clinical diagnosis in routine clinical echocardiography.

Methods

Two hundred sixty patients were prospectively enrolled over 3 years in 12 medical centers in Korea. General image quality, the number of distinguishable segments, ability to assess regional wall motion, left ventricular (LV) apex and right ventricle (RV) visualization, LV ejection fraction, changes in diagnostic or treatment plan were documented after echocardiography with and without ultrasound contrast agent.

Results

Poor or uninterpretable general image was 31% before contrast use, and decreased to 2% (p<0.05) after contrast use. The average number of visualized LV segments was 9.53 before contrast use, and increased to 14.46 (p<0.001) after contrast use. The percentage of poor or not seen LV regional wall motion was decreased from 28.4% to 3.5% (p<0.001). The percentage of poor or not seen LV apex and RV was decreased from 49.4% to 2.4% (p<0.001), from 30.5% to 10.5% (p<0.001), respectively. Changes in diagnostic procedure and treatment plan after CE were 30% and 29.6%, respectively.

Conclusion

Compared to fundamental echocardiography, CE impacted LV function assessment and clinical decision making in Korean patients who undergo routine echocardiography.

Quantification of perflutren microsphere contrast destruction during transit through an ex vivo extracorporeal membrane oxygenation circuit

BACKGROUND

Echocardiography is a key investigation in the management of patients on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). However, echocardiographic images are often non-diagnostic in this patient population. Contrast-enhanced echocardiography may overcome many of these limitations but contrast microspheres are hydrodynamically labile structures prone to destruction from shear forces and turbulent flow, which may exist within an ECMO circuit. This study sought to evaluate microsphere destruction (utilising signal intensity as a marker of contrast concentration) during transit through an ECMO circuit.

METHODS

Activated Definity® contrast was diluted to 50 ml with normal saline and infused into a crystalloid primed ex vivo ECMO with a Quadrox oxygenator at 150 ml/h. Imaging was performed on pre- and post-pump head/oxygenator sections of the circuit using a Philips iE33 scanner and S5-1 transducer. Five-millimetre regions of interest were placed in the centre of the ultrasound field. Average signal intensity (decibels) was calculated at speeds of 1000, 2000, 3000 and 4000 rpm and then repeated with an infusion rate of 300 ml/h. The oxygenator was then spliced out of the circuit and the measures repeated.

RESULTS

There was a significant reduction in contrast concentration during passage through the ECMO circuit at all speeds (with higher pump head speeds resulting in greater microsphere destruction). In a circuit with an oxygenator, relative decrease in signal intensity was 21.4 versus 5.2 % without an oxygenator. There was significant destruction of contrast microspheres during passage through the ECMO circuit at all pump head speeds. An oxygenator contributed to microsphere destruction at a significantly greater level than the pump head alone. There was no significant difference in mean signal intensity reduction in the circuit between an infusion of 150 or 300 ml/h (3.5 ± 3.2 versus 3.6 ± 2.5 dB, respectively, p = 0.79).

CONCLUSIONS

Flow of contrast through an ECMO circuit results in significant destruction of microspheres. Circuits with an oxygenator result in significantly greater levels of contrast destruction than by the pump head alone. Clinicians should be cognisant of the relationship between ECMO circuit configurations, pump head speed and contrast destruction when performing a contrast-enhanced echocardiogram in patients supported with ECMO.

Ultrasound contrast agents

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) plays an important role in imaging of the mediastinum and abdominal organs. Since the introduction of US contrast agents (UCA) for transabdominal US, attempts have been made to apply contrast-enhanced US techniques also to EUS. Since 2003, specific contrast-enhanced imaging was possible using EUS. Important studies have been published regarding contrast-enhanced EUS and the characterization of focal pancreatic lesions, lymph nodes, and subepithelial tumors. In this manuscript, we describe the relevant UCA, their application, and specific image acquisition as well as the principles of image tissue characterization using contrast-enhanced EUS. Safety issues, potential future developments, and EUS-specific issues are reviewed.

Safety of Perflutren Ultrasound Contrast Agents: A Disproportionality Analysis of the US FAERS Database

INTRODUCTION

Perflutren microbubble/microsphere ultrasound contrast agents have a black-box warning based on case reports of serious cardiopulmonary events. There have been several subsequent observational safety studies. Large spontaneous reporting databases may help detect/refine signals of rare adverse events that elude other data sources/study designs.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to supplement existing knowledge of the reported safety of perflutren using statistical analysis of spontaneous reports.

METHODS

We analyzed information from the US Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System using a disproportionality analysis. Analysis of overall reporting for perflutren was supplemented by subset (age, indication) analysis. A signal of disproportionate reporting (SDR) was defined as EB05 >2.

RESULTS

Overall, 18/380 Preferred Terms and 1/83 Standardized Medical Queries had SDRs. Most were small (EB05 = 2-4). Back pain and flank pain were the largest SDRs followed by events compatible with signs/symptoms of hypersensitivity. The general pattern of SDRs in the subset analysis was consistent with the overall analysis. Almost all events with SDRs were literally or conceptually labeled. Except for chest pain (higher in the age <65 years subgroup) and back pain (higher in the age ≥65 years subgroup), there were no statistically significant differences between age subsets. Except for the Preferred Terms Pruritus and Urticaria and the narrow Standardized Medical Queries Ventricular tachyarrhythmia, Angioedema, Oropharyngeal allergic conditions, and Hypersensitivity (higher in the stress test subgroup), there were no statistically significant reporting differences between indication subsets. There were no SDRs associated with the major cardiovascular events of death, myocardial infarction/ischemia, angina, arrhythmias, or convulsions in any analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Our combined signal detection/evaluation analysis did not identify SDRs of novel adverse events or major cardiovascular events associated with perflutren ultrasound contrast agents. The negative results for major cardiovascular events extend previous signal evaluation exercises supporting the relative cardiovascular safety of these agents.

The potential clinical value of contrast-enhanced echocardiography beyond current recommendations

BACKGROUND

Contrast agents are used in resting echocardiography to opacify the left ventricular (LV) cavity and to improve LV endocardial border delineation in patients with suboptimal image quality. If a wider use of contrast-enhanced echocardiography would be adopted instead of the current selective approach, diagnoses such as myocardial ischemia and LV structural abnormalities could potentially be detected earlier. The aim was therefore to retrospectively investigate if contrast-enhanced echocardiography beyond the current recommendations for contrast agent usage affects assessment of wall motion abnormalities, ejection fraction (EF) and detection of LV structural abnormalities. A secondary aim was to evaluate the user dependency during image analysis.

METHODS

Experienced readers (n = 4) evaluated wall motion score index (WMSI) and measured EF on greyscale and contrast-enhanced images from 192 patients without indications for contrast-enhanced echocardiography. Additionally, screening for LV structural abnormalities was performed. Repeated measurements were performed in 20 patients by the experienced as well as by inexperienced (n = 2) readers.

RESULTS

Contrast analysis resulted in significantly higher WMSI compared to greyscale analysis (p < 0.003). Of the 83 patients, classified as healthy by greyscale analysis, 55% were re-classified with motion abnormalities by contrast analysis. No significant difference in EF classification (≥55%, 45-54%, 30-44%, < 30%) was observed. LV structural abnormalities, such as increased trabeculation (n = 21), apical aneurysm (n = 4), hypertrophy (n = 1) and thrombus (n = 1) were detected during contrast analysis. Intra- and interobserver variability for experienced readers as well as the variability between inexperienced and experienced readers decreased for WMSI and EF after contrast analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Contrast-enhanced echocardiography beyond current recommendations for contrast agent usage increased the number of detected wall motion and LV structural abnormalities. Moreover, contrast-enhanced echocardiography increased reproducibility for assessment of WMSI and EF.

The Clinical Impact of Bedside Contrast Echocardiography in Intensive Care Settings: A Korean Multicenter Study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

We assessed the ability of portable echocardiography (with contrasts) to clearly delineate the cardiac structure, and evaluated the impact of its use on the diagnosis and management of critically ill patients in Korea.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

We prospectively enrolled 123 patients (mean age 66±16 years), who underwent portable transthoracic echocardiography (with contrast) for image enhancement at 12 medical centers. The quality of the global left ventricular (LV) images, the number of the regional LV segments visualized, the ability to visualize the LV apex and the right ventricle (RV), and any changes in the diagnostic procedure and treatment strategy were compared before and after the contrast.

RESULTS

Of the 123 patients, 52 (42%) were using mechanical ventilators. The amount of poor or uninterpretable images decreased from 48% to 5% (p<0.001), after the contrast. Before the contrast, 15.6±1.1 of 16 LV segments were seen, which improved to 15.9±0.6 segments (p=0.001) after the contrast. The ability to visualize the LV apex increased from 47% to 94% (p<0.001), while the inability to clearly visualize the RV decreased from 46% to 19% (p<0.001). Changes in the diagnostic procedure (for example, not requiring other types of imaging studies) were observed in 18% of the patients, and the treatment plan (medication) was altered in 26% of patients after the contrast echocardiography.

CONCLUSION

The use of a contrast agent during the portable echocardiography, in intensive care settings, can improve the image quality and impact the diagnostic procedures and treatment for Korean patients.

Contrast Ultrasound Imaging Does Not Affect Heat Shock Protein 70 Expression in Cholesterol-Fed Rabbit Aorta

OBJECTIVES

Diagnostic ultrasound imaging is enhanced by the use of circulating microbubble contrast agents (UCAs), but the interactions between ultrasound, UCAs, and vascular tissue are not fully understood. We hypothesized that ultrasound with a UCA would stress the vascular tissue and increase levels of heat shock protein 70 (Hsp70), a cellular stress protein.

METHODS

Male New Zealand White rabbits (n = 32) were fed a standard chow diet (n = 4) or a 1% cholesterol, 10% fat, and 0.11% magnesium diet (n = 28). At 21 days, 24 rabbits on the cholesterol diet were either exposed to ultrasound (3.2-MHz f/3 transducer; 2.1 MPa; mechanical index, 1.17; 10 Hz pulse repetition frequency; 1.6 microseconds pulse duration; 2 minutes exposure duration at 4 sites along the aorta) with the UCA Definity (1× concentration, 1 mL/min; Lantheus Medical Imaging, North Billerica, MA) or sham exposed with a saline vehicle injection (n = 12 per group). Four rabbits on the cholesterol diet and 4 on the chow diet served as cage controls and were not exposed to ultrasound or restrained for blood sample collection. Animals were euthanized 24 hours after exposure, and aortas were quickly isolated and frozen in liquid nitrogen. Aorta lysates from the area of ultrasound exposure were analyzed for Hsp70 level by Western blot. Blood plasma was analyzed for cholesterol, Hsp70, and von Willebrand factor, a marker of endothelial function.

RESULTS

Plasma total cholesterol levels increased to an average of 705 mg/dL. Ultrasound did not affect plasma von Willebrand factor, plasma Hsp70, or aorta Hsp70. Restraint increased Hsp70 (P < .001, analysis of variance).

CONCLUSIONS

Restraint, but not ultrasound with the UCA or cholesterol feeding, significantly increased Hsp70.

Contrast Ultrasound Imaging of the Aorta Does Not Affect Progression of Atherosclerosis or Cardiovascular Biomarkers in ApoE-/- Mice

OBJECTIVES

Ultrasound contrast agents (UCAs) enhance cardiovascular ultrasound imaging. Adverse biological effects have occurred after administration of UCAs, and more research is needed for a comprehensive understanding of the risks involved. We used the ApoE(-/-) mouse model of atherosclerosis to characterize the effects of ultrasound and UCAs on atherosclerosis and plasma biomarkers.

METHODS

Male ApoE(-/-) mice (8 weeks old; n = 24) were intravenously infused with a UCA (2 × 10(10) Definity microbubbles per hour; Lantheus Medical Imaging, North Billerica, MA) and exposed to 2.8-MHz center frequency ultrasound (10 Hz pulse repetition frequency, 1.4 microseconds pulse duration, 2 minutes exposure duration, and 2 sites) at 1 of 3 derated peak rarefactional pressure amplitudes (0, 1.9, or 3.8 MPa), and then consumed either a chow or Western diet for 4 weeks (n = 4 per group). Blood plasma samples were collected before ultrasound exposure and at 2 and 4 weeks after exposure and assayed for total cholesterol and von Willebrand Factor (vWF). A pathologist measured atheroma thickness in formalin-fixed, hematoxylin-eosin-stained transverse aorta sections and scored them for severity of atherosclerosis.

RESULTS

Plasma total cholesterol initially averaged 286 mg/dL in the Western diet group and increased to 861 mg/dL after 4 weeks on the diet (P < .0001). Total cholesterol did not increase significantly in the chow diet group. Plasma vWF increased after 2 weeks on the Western diet (P < .0001). Atheroma thickness was greater in animals consuming the Western diet than in chow-fed animals (P < .05). Ultrasound had no significant effect on plasma total cholesterol, plasma vWF, or atheroma thickness.

CONCLUSIONS

Contrast ultrasound did not increase the severity of atherosclerosis or alter cardiovascular biomarkers in the ApoE(-/-) mouse model.

Update on the safety and efficacy of commercial ultrasound contrast agents in cardiac applications

Ultrasound contrast agents (UCAs) are currently used throughout the world in both clinical and research settings. The concept of contrast-enhanced ultrasound imaging originated in the late 1960s, and the first commercially available agents were initially developed in the 1980s. Today's microbubbles are designed for greater utility and are used for both approved and off-label indications. In October 2007, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) imposed additional product label warnings that included serious cardiopulmonary reactions, several new disease-state contraindications, and a mandated 30 min post-procedure monitoring period for the agents Optison and Definity. These additional warnings were prompted by reports of cardiopulmonary reactions that were temporally related but were not clearly attributable to these UCAs. Subsequent published reports over the following months established not only the safety but also the improved efficacy of clinical ultrasound applications with UCAs. The FDA consequently updated the product labeling in June 2008 and reduced contraindications, although it continued to monitor select patients. In addition, a post-marketing program was proposed to the sponsors for a series of safety studies to further assess the risk of UCAs. Then in October 2011, the FDA leadership further downgraded the warnings after hearing the results of the post-marketing data, which revealed continued safety and improved efficacy. The present review focuses on the use of UCAs in today's clinical practice, including the approved indications, a variety of off-label uses, and the most recent data, which affirms the safety and efficacy of UCAs.

A primer on the methods and applications for contrast echocardiography in clinical imaging

Contrast echocardiography is broadly described as a variety of techniques whereby the blood pool on cardiac ultrasound is enhanced with encapsulated gas-filled microbubbles or other acoustically active nano- or microparticles. The development of this technology has occurred primarily in response to the need improve current diagnostic applications of echocardiography such as the need to better define left ventricular cavity volumes, regional wall motion, or the presence or absence of masses and thrombi. A secondary reason for the development of contrast echocardiography has been to expand the capabilities of echocardiography. These new applications include myocardial perfusion imaging for detection of ischemia and viability, perfusion imaging of masses/tumors, and molecular imaging. The ability to fill all of these current and future clinical roles has been predicated on the ability to produce robust contrast signal which, in turn, has relied on technical innovation with regards to the microbubble contrast agents and the ultrasound imaging paradigms. In this review, we will discuss the basics of contrast echocardiography including the composition of microbubble contrast agents, the unique imaging methods used to optimize contrast signal-to-noise ratio, and the clinical applications of contrast echocardiography that have made a clinical impact.

Feasibility of perflutren microsphere contrast transthoracic echocardiography in the visualization of ventricular endocardium during venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in a validated ovine model

BACKGROUND

Transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) during extra corporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is important but can be technically challenging. Contrast-specific TTE can improve imaging in suboptimal studies. These contrast microspheres are hydrodynamically labile structures. This study assessed the feasibility of contrast echocardiography (CE) during venovenous (VV) ECMO in a validated ovine model.

METHOD

Twenty-four sheep were commenced on VV ECMO. Parasternal long-axis (Plax) and short-axis (Psax) views were obtained pre- and postcontrast while on VV ECMO. Endocardial definition scores (EDS) per segment were graded: 1 = good, 2 = suboptimal 3 = not seen. Endocardial border definition score index (EBDSI) was calculated for each view. Endocardial length (EL) in the Plax view for the left ventricle (LV) and right ventricle (RV) was measured.

RESULTS

Summation EDS data for the LV and RV for unenhanced TTE (UE) versus CE TTE imaging: EDS 1 = 289 versus 346, EDS 2 = 38 versus 10, EDS 3 = 33 versus 4, respectively. Wilcoxon matched-pairs rank-sign tests showed a significant ranking difference (improvement) pre- and postcontrast for the LV (P < 0.0001), RV (P < 0.0001) and combined ventricular data (P < 0.0001). EBDSI for CE TTE was significantly lower than UE TTE for the LV (1.05 ± 0.17 vs. 1.22 ± 0.38, P = 0.0004) and RV (1.06 ± 0.22 vs. 1.42 ± 0.47, P = 0.0.0006) respectively. Visualized EL was significantly longer in CE versus UE for both the LV (58.6 ± 11.0 mm vs. 47.4 ± 11.7 mm, P < 0.0001) and the RV (52.3 ± 8.6 mm vs. 36.0 ± 13.1 mm, P < 0.0001), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite exposure to destructive hydrodynamic forces, CE is a feasible technique in an ovine ECMO model. CE results in significantly improved EDS and increased EL.

Clinical application and laboratory protocols for performing contrast echocardiography

Technically difficult echocardiographic studies with suboptimal images remain a significant challenge in clinical practice despite advances in imaging technologies over the past decades. Use of microbubble ultrasound contrast for left ventricular opacification and enhancement of endocardial border detection during rest or stress echocardiography has become an essential component of the operation of the modern echocardiography laboratory. Contrast echocardiography has been demonstrated to improve diagnostic accuracy and confidence across a range of indications including quantitative assessment of left ventricular systolic function, wall motion analysis, and left ventricular structural abnormalities. Enhancement of Doppler signals and myocardial contrast echocardiography for perfusion remain off-label uses. Implementation of a contrast protocol is feasible for most laboratories and both physicians and sonographers will require training in contrast specific imaging techniques for optimal use. Previous concerns regarding the safety of contrast agents have since been addressed by more recent data supporting its excellent safety profile and overall cost-effectiveness.

Left ventricular stroke volume quantification by contrast echocardiography - comparison of linear and flow-based methods to cardiac magnetic resonance

BACKGROUND

Echocardiography (echo)-quantified LV stroke volume (SV) is widely used to assess systolic performance after acute myocardial infarction (AMI). This study compared 2 common echo approaches - predicated on flow (Doppler) and linear chamber dimensions (Teichholz) - to volumetric SV and global infarct parameters quantified by cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR).

METHODS

Multimodality imaging was performed as part of a post-AMI registry. For echo, SV was measured by Doppler and Teichholz methods. Cine-CMR was used for volumetric SV and LVEF quantification, and delayed-enhancement (DE) CMR for infarct size.

RESULTS

Overall, 142 patients underwent same day echo and CMR. On echo, mean SV by Teichholz (78 ± 17 mL) was slightly higher than Doppler (75 ± 16 mL; Δ = 3 ± 13 mL; P = 0.02). Compared to SV on CMR (78 ± 18 mL), mean difference by Teichholz (Δ = -0.2 ± 14; P = 0.89) was slightly smaller than Doppler (Δ = -3 ± 14; P = 0.02), but limits of agreement were similar between CMR and echo methods (Teichholz: -28, 27 mL, Doppler: -31, 24 mL). For Teichholz, differences with CMR SV were greatest among patients with anteroseptal or lateral wall hypokinesis (P < 0.05). For Doppler, differences were associated with aortic valve abnormalities or root dilation (P = 0.01). SV by both echo methods decreased stepwise in relation to global LV injury as assessed by CMR-quantified LVEF and infarct size (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Teichholz and Doppler calculated SV yield similar magnitude of agreement with CMR. Teichholz differences with CMR increase with septal or lateral wall contractile dysfunction, whereas Doppler yields increased offsets in patients with aortic remodeling.

Use of contrast echocardiography in intensive care and at the emergency room

Bedside echocardiography in emergency room (ER) or in intensive care unit (ICU) is an important tool for managing critically ill patients, to obtain a timely accurate diagnosis and to immediately stratify the risk to the patient’s life. It may also render invasive monitoring unnecessary. In these patients, contrast echocardiography may improve quality of imaging and also may provide additional information, especially regarding myocardial perfusion in those with suspected coronary artery disease. This article focuses on the principle of contrast echocardiography and the clinical information that can be obtained according to the most frequent presentations in ER and ICU.

Implementation of echocardiographic contrast agents into clinical practice: a United Kingdom National Health Service Survey on behalf of the British Society of Echocardiography

AIMS

The administration of echocardiographic contrast agents has been shown to improve accuracy and be cost-effective in patients with suboptimal endocardial definition. We sought to investigate the implementation of contrast agents in clinical practice.

METHODS AND RESULTS

An electronic questionnaire was devised to determine the use of contrast ultrasound agents in clinical practice and sent electronically to echocardiography departments at each national health service hospital within the UK. Out of 198, 107 departments responded (54%). Out of 673,121 echocardiograms, 25,834 (3.8%) were performed with contrast. Out of 551 echocardiography machines, 358 (65%) were suitable for contrast use. Of the sonographers, out of 711, 112 (15.8%) could perform i.v. cannulation and 42 (5.9%) could administer contrast independently. The median time for an echocardiographic examination was 30 min (inter-quartile range 30-45 min). Significant predictors of contrast use were the presence of a consultant cardiologist with subspecialty training in echocardiography (odds ratio 8.7, P = 0.004), the presence of a stress echocardiography service (odds ratio 2.3, P = 0.004), and the presence of a physician during the day (odds ratio 3.0, P = 0.04). Reasons for impediment in administering contrast were staff training (34.6%), extra time required for a contrast study (29.9%), and the expense of contrast (18.7%).

CONCLUSION

The use of echocardiographic contrast agents within routine echocardiographic practice in the UK is limited to <4% of all transthoracic echocardiographic studies. Major barriers to the implementation of contrast use are the absence of cardiac imaging specialists directly supervising echocardiography departments and the training of sonographers to independently administer contrast.

Prospective randomized comparison of conventional stress echocardiography and real-time perfusion stress echocardiography in detecting significant coronary artery disease

BACKGROUND

Although retrospective studies have suggested that myocardial perfusion and wall motion analysis with real-time myocardial contrast echocardiography (RTMCE) improves the detection of coronary artery disease (CAD) during dobutamine or exercise stress echocardiography, a prospective randomized comparison with conventional stress echocardiography that did not use RTMCE has not been performed.

METHODS

A total of 1,776 patients with preserved resting left ventricular wall motion undergoing dobutamine or exercise stress echocardiography for suspicion of CAD were randomized to either non-RTMCE, for which contrast was used only for the approved indication of enhancing left ventricular opacification, or RTMCE, for which contrast infusion was used in all cases to examine both wall motion and myocardial perfusion. Comparisons in test positivity, and positive predictive value in those subsequently referred for quantitative coronary angiography, were performed.

RESULTS

Patients randomized to RTMCE had significantly higher test positivity (22% for RTMCE vs 15% with non-RTMCE, P = .0002). The increased test positivity occurred without a difference in positive predictive value in predicting >50% diameter stenoses by quantitative coronary angiography (67% for non-RTMCE, 73% for RTMCE). The mechanism for increased detection of CAD with RTMCE was mostly due to the detection of subendocardial wall thickening abnormalities that would have gone undetected when examining transmural wall thickening.

CONCLUSIONS

RTMCE improves the detection of CAD during dobutamine and exercise stress echocardiography, mainly by the detection of subendocardial ischemia.

Safety of echocardiographic contrast in hospitalized patients with pulmonary hypertension: a multi-center study

AIMS

Echocardiographic contrast (EC) improves the diagnostic accuracy of suboptimal echocardiograms. In October 2007, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) placed a black box warning on the label of the perflutren-based agents Definity and Optison, contraindicating their use in patients with pulmonary hypertension (PHT) and unstable cardiopulmonary status, after serious cardiopulmonary reactions occurred in temporal relation to EC administration. In 2008 and 2011, the FDA revised the black box warning allowing their use in this same population. However, limited data exist regarding the safety profile of these agents in patients with PHT.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Consecutive hospitalized patients with PHT who were referred for echocardiographic evaluation, but required the use of EC, were included. All our patients received the EC agent Definity. We evaluated these patients for serious adverse events (respiratory decompensation, hypotension, syncope, convulsions, arrhythmias, anaphylactic reactions, or death) occurring within 24 h of EC administration. The study group included 1513 patients (age 69 ± 14 years, 55% males, BMI 33 ± 9 kg/m(2)), of which 911 (60%) had mild PHT, 515 (34%) had moderate PHT, and 87 (6%) had severe PHT. The mean pulmonary artery systolic pressures (PASP) in the groups with mild, moderate, and severe PHT were 41 ± 4 (range 35-49) mmHg, 55 ± 5 (range 50-69) mmHg, and 78 ± 9 (range 70-122) mmHg, respectively. The incidence of adverse events in all subgroups was rare (0.002%) and they were not attributed to EC because of temporal and clinical considerations.

CONCLUSION

The use of the EC agent Definity is safe in hospitalized patients with PHT.

A retrospective comparison of mortality in critically ill hospitalized patients undergoing echocardiography with and without an ultrasound contrast agent

OBJECTIVES

To compare acute mortality in critically ill hospitalized patients undergoing echocardiography with and without an ultrasound contrast agent (UCA).

BACKGROUND

Because of serious cardiopulmonary reactions reported immediately after administration of perflutren-containing UCAs, the FDA required a black box safety warning for this class of agents, including perflutren protein-type A microspheres injectable suspension.

METHODS

This study used the largest hospital service-level database in the U.S. All adult patients undergoing in-patient echocardiography between January 2003 and October 2005 were identified (n = 2,588,722, of which 22,499 received perflutren protein-type A microspheres injectable suspension). Of the 22,499 contrast echocardiography patients, 2,900 had diagnoses meeting criteria for critical illness (heart failure, acute myocardial infarction, arrhythmia, respiratory failure, pulmonary embolism, emphysema, and pulmonary hypertension). To control for the differences between the contrast and noncontrast patients, we used propensity score matching. Variables used in the construction of the propensity score included comorbidities, demographic factors, hospital-specific factors, level of care, and mechanical ventilation status. Patients receiving contrast echocardiography were matched to 4 control patients who received noncontrast echocardiography. Conditional logistic regression was used to estimate mortality effects.

RESULTS

There were 167 deaths in the study among critically ill patients, 38 of 2,900 from the contrast group and 129 of 11,600 from the control group. The contrast agent was not associated with an increase in same-day mortality (odds ratio: 1.18; 95% confidence interval: 0.82 to 1.71; p = 0.37). Before matching, contrast patients showed greater morbidity than noncontrast patients (Deyo-Charlson comorbidity score 2.45 vs. 2.25, p < 0.0001). After propensity score matching, these differences were significantly reduced, showing that both groups were well balanced.

CONCLUSIONS

There is no increase in mortality in critically ill patients undergoing echocardiography with the UCA compared with case-matched control patients.

American Society of Echocardiography Consensus Statement on the Clinical Applications of Ultrasonic Contrast Agents in Echocardiography

ACCREDITATION STATEMENT: The American Society of Echocardiography (ASE) is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The ASE designates this educational activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 Credit.trade mark Physicians should only claim credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. The American Registry of Diagnostic Medical Sonographers and Cardiovascular Credentialing International recognize the ASE's certificates and have agreed to honor the credit hours toward their registry requirements for sonographers. The ASE is committed to resolving all conflict-of-interest issues, and its mandate is to retain only those speakers with financial interests that can be reconciled with the goals and educational integrity of the educational program. Disclosure of faculty and commercial support sponsor relationships, if any, have been indicated.

TARGET AUDIENCE

This activity is designed for all cardiovascular physicians, cardiac sonographers, and nurses with a primary interest and knowledge base in the field of echocardiography; in addition, residents, researchers, clinicians, sonographers, and other medical professionals having a specific interest in contrast echocardiography may be included.

OBJECTIVES

Upon completing this activity, participants will be able to: 1. Demonstrate an increased knowledge of the applications for contrast echocardiography and their impact on cardiac diagnosis. 2. Differentiate the available ultrasound contrast agents and ultrasound equipment imaging features to optimize their use. 3. Recognize the indications, benefits, and safety of ultrasound contrast agents, acknowledging the recent labeling changes by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regarding contrast agent use and safety information. 4. Identify specific patient populations that represent potential candidates for the use of contrast agents, to enable cost-effective clinical diagnosis. 5. Incorporate effective teamwork strategies for the implementation of contrast agents in the echocardiography laboratory and establish guidelines for contrast use. 6. Use contrast enhancement for endocardial border delineation and left ventricular opacification in rest and stress echocardiography and unique patient care environments in which echocardiographic image acquisition is frequently challenging, including intensive care units (ICUs) and emergency departments. 7. Effectively use contrast echocardiography for the diagnosis of intracardiac and extracardiac abnormalities, including the identification of complications of acute myocardial infarction. 8. Assess the common pitfalls in contrast imaging and use stepwise, guideline-based contrast equipment setup and contrast agent administration techniques to optimize image acquisition.

Acute mortality in hospitalized patients undergoing echocardiography with and without an ultrasound contrast agent (multicenter registry results in 4,300,966 consecutive patients)

We sought to define acute mortality in a large multicenter cohort of hospitalized patients undergoing clinically indicated echocardiography with and without use of an ultrasound contrast agent. Although the United States Food and Drug Administration recently relaxed the issued warnings for perflutren-containing ultrasound contrast agents on May 13, 2008, concerns still exist regarding the safety of these compounds, particularly in critically ill patients. A retrospective analysis was performed using the Premier Perspective Database. Patients undergoing echocardiography during hospitalization were separated into those performed without contrast enhancement and those performed with perflutren lipid microsphere (PLM) injectable suspension contrast agent (Definity, Lantheus Medical Imaging, North Billerica, Massachusetts). Vital status within 1 day of the echocardiogram was available for all patients using hospital billing data. Between January 1, 2002 and October 31, 2007, 4,300,966 patients underwent transthoracic echocardiography at rest during hospitalization (unenhanced studies n = 4,242,712 and contrast-enhanced studies n = 58,254). Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to compare 24-hour mortality, controlling for case mix and clinical covariates; 1-day mortality rates were 1.08% (n = 45,789 deaths) for patients undergoing noncontrast studies and 1.06% (n = 616 deaths) for patients undergoing contrast-enhanced examinations (p = 0.613). Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that, in patients undergoing an echocardiogram, patients receiving PLM injectable suspension contrast agent were 24% less likely to die within 1-day than patients not receiving a contrast agent (adjusted odds ratio = 0.76, 95% confidence interval 0.70 to 0.82). In conclusion, acute crude mortality was not increased in patients receiving PLM injectable suspension contrast agent. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that, compared with patients not receiving a contrast agent, administration of PLM injectable suspension contrast agent during echocardiography was associated with a 24% decreased risk of mortality.