Myocardial Viability
Myocardial Viability - Related Videos
08:13
In Vivo Quantitative Assessment of Myocardial Structure, Function, Perfusion and Viability Using Cardiac Micro-computed Tomography
0 Views •
Cited by 17 •
2016
This method outlines the use of Quantum Micro-Computed Tomography (MicroCT) to assess cardiac morphology, function, perfusion, metabolism and viability with iodinated contrast agent in mice with experimentally-induced myocardial ischemia. The technique can be applied for non-destructive high-throughput longitudinal in vivo imaging of various animal models of human heart disease.
08:23
LAD-Ligation: A Murine Model of Myocardial Infarction
0 Views •
Cited by 81 •
2009
This video demonstrates how to use a fast and reliable model to study pathobiological and pathophysiological processes of myocardial ischemia.
12:03
Viability Assays for Cells in Culture
0 Views •
Cited by 39 •
2014
Therapeutic compounds are often first examined in vitro with viability assays. Blind cell counts by a human observer can be highly sensitive to small changes in cell number but do not assess function. Computerized viability assays, as described here, can assess both structure and function in an objective manner.
05:47
Counting and Determining the Viability of Cultured Cells
0 Views •
Cited by 19 •
2008
Determining the number of cells in culture is important in standardization of culture conditions and in performing accurate quantitation experiments. In this video, we demonstrate how cells are counted using a hemacytometer.
07:45
Acute Myocardial Infarction in Rats
0 Views •
Cited by 103 •
2011
The rat model of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is useful to study the consequence of a MI on cardiac pathophysiological and physiological function.
FAQs
Reduced contractility does not by itself prove that heart muscle has been irreversibly damaged. In ischemic disease, tissue can remain metabolically active and structurally intact even when blood flow and mechanical performance are diminished. Detecting this mismatch matters because restoring blood flow may allow functional recovery in selected regions.
These tests do not measure the same feature. Positron emission tomography emphasizes whether tissue remains metabolically active, cardiac magnetic resonance characterizes tissue properties, dobutamine echocardiography tests contractile reserve, and SPECT evaluates perfusion. Because viability can be expressed through different biological signals, comparing these approaches helps distinguish recoverable tissue from irreversible injury.
Scar represents irreversible injury, whereas preserved tissue characteristics suggest that dysfunction may not be permanent. This distinction changes the interpretation of a poorly contracting region: it may be a target for revascularization rather than evidence of completed tissue loss. The result can influence expectations for functional recovery and contribute to prognostic assessment in ischemic heart disease.
It is particularly relevant after myocardial infarction and in chronic coronary artery disease, where reduced function may coexist with either recoverable tissue or scar. In these settings, clinicians can use viability findings to identify patients who may benefit from revascularization and to support treatment planning rather than judging a region from contractility alone.
Viability findings provide more than an anatomical description of an injured region. They help estimate whether function may improve, support prognostic evaluation, and inform decisions about revascularization. A result showing preserved biological activity or structural integrity can therefore carry different implications from one showing irreversible injury, even when both regions display impaired contractility.
Interpretation should connect the measured signal with the underlying tissue state. Positron emission tomography contributes metabolic information, SPECT contributes perfusion information, dobutamine echocardiography contributes evidence of contractile reserve, and cardiac magnetic resonance contributes tissue characterization. Considering these complementary findings helps avoid treating reduced motion as synonymous with scar and supports a more informed revascularization strategy.