Comparative Value of Dobutamine and Adenosine Stress in the Detection of Coronary Stenosis With Myocardial Contrast Echocardiography

Abstract

Background —Controversy continues as to whether adenosine or dobutamine is the superior pharmacological stress agent for myocardial contrast echocardiography (MCE). Methods and Results —We compared real-time MCE refilling curves and wall thickening during adenosine and dobutamine stress in 14 open-chest dogs with left anterior descending and left circumflex coronary artery stenoses that reduced hyperemia by 40% to 60% and 70% to 90% (mild and severe non–flow-limiting stenosis, NFLS) and resting flow by 10% to 30% and 35% to 50% (mild and severe flow-limiting stenosis, FLS). MCE was performed with low-energy imaging during Optison infusion. After high-energy bubble destruction, time-intensity data from risk beds were fitted for an exponential function as y =A(1− e − bt ), from which the rate of intensity increase (b) and maximal plateau intensity (A) were derived. Although severe NFLS and greater stenoses decreased b with both dobutamine and adenosine, with mild NFLS it was reduced in 58% of animals with dobutamine versus 8% with adenosine. The absolute decrease in b, however, was greater for adenosine than dobutamine with FLS. The A parameter was decreased with both adenosine and dobutamine only with the most severe FLS. Wall thickening was decreased with dobutamine in 33% of animals with severe NFLS and in all animals with any FLS; with adenosine, in all with severe FLS. Conclusions —Both dobutamine and adenosine significantly reduce MCE refilling rates in the setting of severe stenosis and in the absence of contractile abnormalities. Dobutamine decreases refilling rate and wall thickening at a less reduced flow grade than adenosine, but adenosine produces a greater magnitude of change than dobutamine.