Does Laser Type Impact Myocardial Function Following Transmyocardial Laser Revascularization?
Does Laser Type Impact Myocardial Function Following Transmyocardial Laser Revascularization?
复制标题
DOI:
10.1002/lsm.21012
复制
发表时间:
2010-12-01
影响因子:
2.4
通讯作者:
Horvath, Keith A.
中科院分区:
文献类型:
--
作者:
Estvold, Soren K.;Mordini, Frederico;Horvath, Keith A.
Background: Transmyocardial laser revascularization (TMR) is currently clinically performed with either a CO2 or Ho:YAG laser for the treatment of severe angina. While both lasers provide symptomatic relief, there are significant differences in the laser-tissue interactions specific to each device that may impact their ability to enhance the perfusion of myocardium and thereby improve contractile function of the ischemic heart.Methods: A porcine model of chronic myocardial ischemia was employed. After collecting baseline functional data with cine magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and dobutamine stress echo (DSE), 14 animals underwent TMR with either a CO2 or Ho: YAG laser. Transmural channels were created with each laser in a distribution of 1/cm(2) in the ischemic zone. Six weeks post-treatment repeat MRI as well as DSE were obtained after which the animals were sacrificed. Histology was preformed to characterize the laser-tissue interaction.Results: CO2 TMRled to improvement in wall thickening in the ischemic area as seen with cine MRI(40.3% vs. baseline, P < 0.05) and DSE (20.2% increase vs. baseline, P < 0.05). Ho: YAG treated animals had no improvement in wall thickening by MRI (-11.6% vs. baseline, P = .67) and DSE ( 16.7% vs. baseline, P = 0.08). Correlative semi-quantitative histology revealed a significantly higher fibrosis index in Ho: YAG treated myocardium versus CO2 (1.81 vs. 0.083, P < 0.05).Conclusions: In a side-by-side comparison CO2 TMR resulted in improved function of ischemic myocardium as assessed by MRI and echocardiography. Ho:YAG TMRled to no improvement in regional function likely due to concomitant increase in fibrosis in the lasered area. Lasers Surg. Med. 42:746-751, 2010. (C) 2010 Wiley-Liss, Inc.