2001
DOI: 10.1067/mje.2001.112908
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Accuracy and reproducibility of coronary flow rate assessment by real-time contrast echocardiography: In vitro and in vivo studies

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

4
30
0
1

Year Published

2005
2005
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
4

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 42 publications
(35 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
4
30
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Neither closed-chest MCE nor end-systolic triggering acquisition was validated with the established technique of microspheres; however, real-time acquisition is an accepted technique for MBF estimation. 44,45 Finally, we did not quantify absolute MBF. Recently, Vogel et al 14 demonstrated that normalizing A␤ obtained in the myocardial walls by the LV cavity signal intensity provides absolute measurements of MBF in humans.…”
Section: Raher Et Al Murine Contrast Echocardiographymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Neither closed-chest MCE nor end-systolic triggering acquisition was validated with the established technique of microspheres; however, real-time acquisition is an accepted technique for MBF estimation. 44,45 Finally, we did not quantify absolute MBF. Recently, Vogel et al 14 demonstrated that normalizing A␤ obtained in the myocardial walls by the LV cavity signal intensity provides absolute measurements of MBF in humans.…”
Section: Raher Et Al Murine Contrast Echocardiographymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The signals from the microbubbles in the blood flow are therefore enhanced dramatically [19]. Thus, blood flowing with a very low velocity, such as in the microcirculation of the testis, can be detected, and the slightest change in blood perfusion in the contralateral testis can be quantitatively measured with the TICs [20].…”
Section: Groupmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Qualitative assessment has not yet been standardized and the use of the same replenishment cut-off values for different left ventricular segments may be inappropriate. Lafitte et al [31] showed that myocardial contrast replenishment-derived quantitative parameters vary with angle and depth of beam path. Moreover, the comparison of myocardial contrast enhancement with the most opacified segment may be suboptimal due to artifacts [31].…”
Section: Study Limitationsmentioning
confidence: 99%