This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 106/9/1104    most recent 01.CIR.0000027566.51212.3Fv1 Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map 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 Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Bowers, T. R. Articles by Goldstein, J. A. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Bowers, T. R. Articles by Goldstein, J. A. Related Collections Acute myocardial infarction

(Circulation. 2002;106:1104.)
© 2002 American Heart Association, Inc.

Clinical Investigation and Reports

Patterns of Coronary Compromise Resulting in Acute Right Ventricular Ischemic Dysfunction

From the Division of Cardiology, William Beaumont Hospital, Royal Oak, Mich.

Correspondence to James A. Goldstein, MD, Director of Cardiovascular Research and Education, Division of Cardiology, William Beaumont Hospital, 3601 W Thirteen Mile Rd, Royal Oak, MI 48073-6769. E-mail jgoldstein{at}beaumont.edu

Background— Although proximal right coronary artery (RCA) occlusion is the culprit commonly responsible for acute right ventricular (RV) infarction (RVI), the severity of RV dysfunction ranges broadly. This study was designed to delineate the patterns of coronary compromise that determine the magnitude of RV ischemic dysfunction.

Methods and Results— In 125 patients with acute inferior myocardial infarction undergoing emergency angiography, the culprit infarct lesion was identified, RV branch flow assessed (TIMI flows and frame counts), and individual patient RV perfusion indices calculated by separately averaging the branch flows and frame counts, which were correlated with RV wall motion by ultrasound. RVI occurred in 53 (42%) patients, with the RCA as the culprit vessel and the lesion sufficiently proximal to compromise flow in at least one RV branch in all cases, thereby resulting in depressed RV perfusion (flow index, 0.7±0.2). In patients without RVI, the RCA was the culprit in 89%; the circumflex, in 11%. RCA culprits were proximal in 19% of such cases, with lack of RVI explained by preserved RV perfusion (flow index, 2.7±0.3; P=0.001) attributable to at least 1 patent RV branch, spontaneous reperfusion, or prominent collaterals. Overall, there was a strong correlation between RV perfusion and wall motion (Spearman correlation coefficient=0.79).

Conclusions— Proximal RCA occlusion compromising RV branch perfusion commonly results in RV ischemic dysfunction. In some cases with proximal RCA culprits, collaterals or spontaneous reperfusion preserve RV performance.

Key Words: ventricles • arteries • myocardial infarction • collateral circulation

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. Kumar, H. Abdel-Aty, I. Kriedemann, J. Schulz-Menger, C. M. Gross, R. Dietz, and M. G. Friedrich Contrast-Enhanced Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Right Ventricular Infarction J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., November 21, 2006; 48(10): 1969 - 1976. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. A. Goldstein Right versus left ventricular shock: A tale of two ventricles J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., April 16, 2003; 41(8): 1280 - 1282. [Full Text] [PDF]