Search

In order to evaluate the place of dobutamine echocardiography in everyday practice, this test and a stress ECG were performed in 34 patients referred for diagnostic or assessment coronary angiography. Dobutamine, administered in 3-minute stages from 5 to 30 micrograms/kg/min, was well tolerated. The anti-ischaemic treatment was continued in 26 patients before dobutamine echocardiography and in 15 patients before the stress ECG. The electrocardiographic, echocardiographic and angiographic documents were each analysed by 2 independent observers. Dobutamine echocardiography was considered to be positive in the presence of the development of a new abnormality of segmental kinetics or when abnormality of segmental kinetics was identified outside of the territory of infarction. With reference to coronary angiography, the sensitivity of stress ECG and dobutamine echocardiography was 46% and 42%, respectively, and the specificity was 75% and 88%, respectively; the sensitivity of each test was low, probably because of fake tests. The combination of the two tests improved the sensitivity (69%) without altering the specificity (75%). Dobutamine echocardiography could usefully complete a negative stress ICG whenever a false-negative result is suspected to avoir wrongly reassuring some patients and to allow appropriate management.

Sixty consecutive coronary patients operated on by the same team in 1992 were divided into two groups: group 1 (30 patients) using intermittent oxygenated cold Fresenius solution antegrade and retrograde (FR), group 2 (30 patients) using warm retrograde blood cardioplegia (WRC) with the Fremes solution initially antegrade and retrograde (high potassium solution) then continuous retrograde low potassium solution. All patients were submitted to only arterial grafts (3 to 4) using both internal mammary arteries and the the right gastroepiploic artery. There were no differences in mean preoperative data between the 2 groups. The times of aortic cross-clamping (P < 0.05) and bypass after release of the aortic clamp (P < 0.01) were significantly higher in the WRC group. No significant difference was observed in the number of postoperative supraventricular arrhythmias or electrocardiographic infarctions. A significant difference was observed with higher values of the enzymes (aspartate amino transferase, creatine kinase) for the WRC group on the first (P < 0.05) and the second postoperative days (P < 0.01). More patients in the WRC group received vasoactive or inotropic drugs in the intensive care unit, where they stayed a longer time because of hemodynamic instability or enzyme elevation (P < 0.05). In conclusion, for coronary arterial revascularization, WRC is technically more demanding and does not appear to afford optimal myocardial protection.