Download PDF
Nuklearmedizin 2009; 48(03): 104-109
DOI: 10.3413/nukmed-0210
Original article
Schattauer GmbH

Myocardial perfusion after one year of spinal cord stimulation in patients with refractory angina

Untersuchung der myokardialen Perfusion nach einem Jahr Neuro stimulation bei Patienten mit therapie refraktärer Angina- pectoris- Symptomatik
E. Fricke
1   Institute of Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Heart and Diabetes Centre North Rhine-Westphalia, Ruhr-University Bochum, Germany
,
S. Eckert
2   Department of Cardiology
,
A. Dongas
3   Institute of Anaesthesiology, Heart and Diabetes Centre North Rhine-Westphalia, Ruhr-University Bochum, Germany
,
H. Fricke
1   Institute of Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Heart and Diabetes Centre North Rhine-Westphalia, Ruhr-University Bochum, Germany
,
R. Preuss
1   Institute of Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Heart and Diabetes Centre North Rhine-Westphalia, Ruhr-University Bochum, Germany
,
O. Lindner
1   Institute of Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Heart and Diabetes Centre North Rhine-Westphalia, Ruhr-University Bochum, Germany
,
D. Horstkotte
2   Department of Cardiology
,
W. Burchert
1   Institute of Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Heart and Diabetes Centre North Rhine-Westphalia, Ruhr-University Bochum, Germany
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

received: 07 September 2008

accepted in revised form: 27 January 2008

Publication Date:
22 January 2018 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Summary

Aim: Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is recommended for patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) and refractory angina. We used positron emission tomography (PET) to investigate the long-term effect of SCS on regional myocardial perfusion in patients suffering from angina pectoris refractory to medical treatment and without option for coronary intervention. Patients, methods: We analyzed data of 44 patients with stable CAD (91% three vessel disease). At baseline, we determined coronary flow reserve (CFR) using 13N-ammonia-PET and myocardial viability with 18F-FDG. SCS was performed for one year (Medtronic Itrell III or Synergy, Düsseldorf, Germany). During follow-up, no cardiac interventions were necessary and no myocardial infarctions occurred. At one year follow-up, CFR was measured again. Results: In the majority of patients (77%), SCS led to an improvement of clinical symptoms. CFR did not change significantly during follow-up. Subjective improvement did not correlate with an increase of CFR. Conclusions: Despite its clinical effect, SCS does not have a direct impact on CFR in patients with stable CAD. According to our results, the pain relief is not due to an improvement of the myocardial blood supply.

Zusammenfassung

Ziel: Neurostimulation (Spinal-Cord-Stimulation, SCS) ist eine anerkannte Therapie für Patienten mit refraktärer Angina-Pectoris-Symptomatik (AP) im Rahmen einer koronaren Herzerkrankung (KHK). Wir untersuchten mit Hilfe der Positronenemissionstomographie (PET) den Langzeiteffekt von SCS auf die regionale myokardiale Durchblutung bei Patienten mit medikamentös nicht beherrschbarer AP, bei denen keine Interventionsmöglichkeit bestand. Patienten, Patienten, Methodik: 44 Patienten mit stabiler KHK (bei 91% 3-Gefäß- KHK) erhielten eine Einschlussuntersuchung, bei der die koronare Flussreserve (CFR) mittels dynamischer PET mit 13N-Ammoniak bestimmt wurde und die Vitalität anhand einer PET-Untersuchung mit 18F-FDG beurteilt wurde. Danach erfolgte eine Neurostimulations- Therapie für ein Jahr (Medtronic Itrell III oder Synergy, Düsseldorf, Deutschland). Während dieses Jahres erhielt keiner der Patienten eine kardiale Intervention, und kein Patient erlitt einen Herzinfarkt. Bei der Jahreskontrolle erfolgte eine erneute Bestimmung der CFR. Ergebnisse: Bei den meisten Patienten (77%) führte die SCS zur Besserung der klinischen Symptomatik. Demgegenüber zeigte sich keine signifikante Änderung der CFR. Die vom Patienten empfundene Besserung der Symptomatik ging nicht mit einer Steigerung der CFR einher. Schlussfolgerungen: Trotz der klinischen Wirksamkeit hat die SCS keinen direkten Einfluss auf die CFR bei Patienten mit stabiler KHK. Unseren Ergebnissen zufolge ist die Schmerzbesserung nicht auf eine Verbesserung der myokardialen Durchblutung zurückzuführen.

Keywords

Coronary artery disease - spinal cord stimulation - angina pectoris - palliative care - positron emission tomography - myocardial blood flow

Schlüsselwörter

Koronare Herzerkrankung - Neurostimulation - Angina pectoris - PET - palliative Therapie - myokardialer Blutfluss
 

  • References

  • 1 Andrell P, Ekre O, Eliasson T. et al. Cost-effectiveness of spinal cord stimulation versus coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with severe angina pectoris--long-term results from the ESBY study. Cardiology 2003; 99: 20-24.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Ansari S, Chaudhri K, Moutaery K. Neurostimulation for refractory angina pectoris. Acta Neur- ochir Suppl 2007; 97: 283-288.
    Google Scholar
  • 3 Buchser E, Durrer A, Albrecht E. Spinal cord stimulation for the management of refractory angina pectoris. J Pain Symptom Manage 2006; 31: S36-S42.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Campeau L. Letter: Grading of angina pectoris. Circulation 1976; 54: 522-523.
    Google Scholar
  • 5 De Landsheere C, Mannheimer C, Habets A. et al. Effect of spinal cord stimulation on regional myocardial perfusion assessed by positron emission tomography. Am J Cardiol 1992; 69: 1143-1149.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Diedrichs H, Zobel C, Theissen P. et al. Symptomatic relief precedes improvement of myocardial blood flow in patients under spinal cord stimulation. Curr Control Trials Cardiovasc Med 2005; 6: 7.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Dyer MT, Goldsmith KA, Khan SN. et al. Clinical and cost-effectiveness analysis of an open label, single-centre, randomised trial of Spinal Cord Stimulation versus Percutaneous Myocardial Laser Revascularisation in patients with Refractory Angina Pectoris: the SPiRiT trial. Trials 2008; 9: 40.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Eddicks S, Maier-Hauff K, Schenk M. et al. Thoracic spinal cord stimulation improves functional status and relieves symptoms in patients with refractory angina pectoris: the first placebo-controlled randomised study. Heart 2007; 93: 585-590.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Ekre O, Eliasson T, Norrsell H. et al. Long-term effects of spinal cord stimulation and coronary artery bypass grafting on quality of life and survival in the ESBY study. Eur Heart J 2002; 23: 1938-1945.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Gowda RM, Khan IA, Punukollu G. et al. Treatment of refractory angina pectoris. Int J Cardiol 2005; 101: 1-7.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Hautvast RW, Blanksma PK, DeJongste MJ. et al. Effect of spinal cord stimulation on myocardial blood flow assessed by positron emission tomography in patients with refractory angina pectoris. Am J Cardiol 1996; 77: 462-467.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Hutchins GD, Schwaiger M, Rosenspire KC. et al. Noninvasive quantification of regional blood flow in the human heart using 13N-ammonia and dynamic positron emission tomographic imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol 1990; 15: 1032-1042.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Kendziorra K, Walther C, Foerster M. et al. Changes in myocardial perfusion due to physical exercise in patients with stable coronary artery disease. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2005; 32: 813-819.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Kronhaus KD, Lawson WE. Enhanced external counterpulsation is an effective treatment for Syndrome X. Int J Cardiol. 2008 DOI 10.1016/j.ijcard.2008.03.022.
    Google Scholar
  • 15 Latif OA, Nedeljkovic SS, Stevenson LW. Spinal cord stimulation for chronic intractable angina pectoris: a unified theory on its mechanism. Clin Cardiol 2001; 24: 533-541.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Latif OA, Raj PP. Spinal cord stimulation: a comparison of efficacy versus other novel treatments for refractory angina pectoris. Pain Pract 2001; 1: 36-45.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Loh PH, Cleland JG, Louis AA. et al. Enhanced external counterpulsation in the treatment of chronic refractory angina: a long-term follow-up outcome from the International Enhanced External Counterpulsation Patient Registry. Clin Cardiol 2008; 31: 159-164.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Mannheimer C, Eliasson T, Augustinsson LE. et al. Electrical stimulation versus coronary artery bypass surgery in severe angina pectoris: the ESBY study. Circulation 1998; 97: 1157-1163.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 19 McNab D, Khan SN, Sharples LD. et al. An open label, single-centre, randomized trial of spinal cord stimulation vs. percutaneous myocardial laser revascularization in patients with refractory angina pectoris: the SPiRiT trial. Eur Heart J 2006; 27: 1048-1053.
    Google Scholar
  • 20 Melzack R, Wall PD. Pain mechanisms: a new theory. Science 1965; 150: 971-979.
    Google Scholar
  • 21 Murphy DF, Giles KE. Intractable angina pectoris: management with dorsal column stimulation. Med J Aust 1987; 146: 260.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Murphy DF, Giles KE. Dorsal column stimulation for pain relief from intractable angina pectoris. Pain 1987; 28: 365-368.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Rosenspire KC, Schwaiger M, Mangner TJ. et al. Metabolic fate of (13N)ammonia in human and canine blood. J Nucl Med 1990; 31: 163-167.
    Google Scholar
  • 24 Van den Hoff J, Burchert W, Borner AR. et al. (1-nC)Acetate as a quantitative perfusion tracer in myocardial PET. J Nucl Med 2001; 42: 1174-1182.
    Google Scholar
  • 25 Yu W, Maru F, Edner M. et al. Spinal cord stimulation for refractory angina pectoris: a retrospective analysis of efficacy and cost-benefit. Coron Artery Dis 2004; 15: 31-37.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar