This Article Abstract Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Mahrholdt, H. Articles by Judd, R. M. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Mahrholdt, H. Articles by Judd, R. M.

Relationship of contractile function to transmural extent of infarction in patients with chronic coronary artery disease

Heiko Mahrholdt, MD^*, Anja Wagner, MD^*, Michele Parker, MS, RN, Matthias Regenfus, MD^*, David S. Fieno, PhD, Robert O. Bonow, MD, FACC^*, Raymond J. Kim, MD, FACC^* and Robert M. Judd, PhD^*,*

^* Feinberg Cardiovascular Research Institute, Chicago, IllinoisUSA
Departments of Medicine, Northwestern University Medical School, Chicago, Illinois USA
Biomedical Engineering, Northwestern University Medical School, Chicago, Illinois, USA

View larger version (102K): [in a new window]   Figure 1 Typical results comparing contractile function with infarct transmurality in regions with subendocardial infarction in Patient #13. The full cine version of Figure 1 can be viewed at: http://dcmrc.mc.duke.edu/mahrholdt/fig1/.

View larger version (22K): [in a new window]   Figure 2 Summary of the segmental results for all subjects both qualitatively (A) and quantitatively (B). The transmural extent of infarction is expressed in quartiles (e.g., 0%, 1% to 25%, 26% to 50%, 51% to 75%, >75%); error bars represent standard deviation. All groups marked with an asterisk are statistically different from 0% (p < 0.05). WM = wall motion.

View larger version (17K): [in a new window]   Figure 3 To evaluate the potential influence of misregistration, the data were analyzed using a model with larger segments (the ACC-recommended 17-segment model, A). To evaluate the potential influence of through-plane motion, the long-axis (LAX) images alone were analyzed using a six-segment model (B). Results for both were similar to those of the 72-segment model (Fig. 2). All groups marked with an asterisk are statistically different from 0% (p < 0.05).

View larger version (17K): [in a new window]   Figure 4 Summary of the results by patient as opposed to segmentally. See text for details. LV = left ventricular; MI = myocardial infarction; TEI = transmural extent of infarction.

View larger version (56K): [in a new window]   Figure 5 Typical results of contractile function in regions with nearly transmural infarction surrounded by normal moving neighbors in Patient #14. The full cine version of Figure 5 can be viewed at: http://dcmrc.mc.duke.edu/mahrholdt/fig5/.

View larger version (22K): [in a new window]   Figure 6 The results from patient segments shown in Figure 2 are here divided into those with abnormal and normal moving neighbors, both qualitatively (A) and quantitatively (B). The transmural extent of infarction is expressed in quartiles; error bars represent standard deviation. See text for details. WM = wall motion.