Advertisement

Click here for more guidelines.

 
 




CME Topic Collections Past Issues Search Current Issue Home
     

J Am Coll Cardiol, 2009; 54:1123-1130, doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2009.04.089
© 2009 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Correction (v54,p1635)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (2)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Al Jaroudi, W.
Right arrow Articles by Iskandrian, A. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Al Jaroudi, W.
Right arrow Articles by Iskandrian, A. E.
Related Collections
Right arrowRelated Article

Regadenoson: A New Myocardial Stress Agent

Wael Al Jaroudi, MD* and Ami E. Iskandrian, MD

Division of Cardiovascular Diseases, Department of Medicine, The University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama


Figure 1
View larger version (18K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
 
Figure 1 Chemical Structures of Adenosine and Regadenoson

MW = molecular weight.

 

Figure 2
View larger version (17K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
 
Figure 2 Comparison of Regadenoson Versus Adenosine on Vascular Resistance in Dogs

Regadenoson caused a smaller decrease in systemic vascular resistance compared with adenosine. Both drugs reduced mesenteric vascular resistance to the same extent. *p < 0.05. The error bars represent the standard error of the means.

 

Figure 3
View larger version (15K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
 
Figure 3 Effect of Aminophylline Infusion on Regadenoson-Mediated Coronary Vasodilation in Human Volunteers

Aminophylline injection (100 mg) did not affect the peak-to-baseline coronary flow velocity reserve (CFVR) ratio, but significantly blunted the duration of hyperemia (2-fold increase in CFVR above baseline). *p < 0.05.

 

Figure 4
View larger version (87K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
 
Figure 4 Regadenoson/Rest SPECT Images Showing a Large Reversible Perfusion Abnormality in the Inferior and Lateral Segments of the LV Myocardium

By quantitative analysis, the abnormality involved 29% of the myocardium. The patient is a 54-year-old man with chest pains. LV = left ventricular; SPECT = single-photon emission computed tomography.

 

Figure 5
View larger version (13K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
 
Figure 5 Changes in HR and Blood Pressure With Regadenoson Versus Adenosine

Regadenoson bolus administration caused a greater increase in maximal heart rate (HR) than did an adenosine infusion (*p < 0.05). Effects of regadenoson and adenosine on systolic and diastolic blood pressure (BP) were not statistically different. The error bars represent standard error of the mean.

 

Figure 6
View larger version (17K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
 
Figure 6 Summed Symptom Score With Regadenoson and Adenosine

The mean summed symptom score for chest pain, dyspnea, and flushing, and the mean summed score of all the symptoms were significantly lower in the regadenoson versus adenosine groups (*p < 0.05). The score for each symptom was calculated as: 0, absent; 1, mild; 2, moderate; and 3, severe. The error bars represent standard error of the mean.

 




 
  CME Topic Collections Past Issues Search Current Issue Home

Advertisement