Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 297

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Improved left ventricular endocardial border delineation and opacification with OPTISON (FS069), a new echocardiographic contrast agent

Open access
Cohen, Jerald L, Cheirif, Jorge, Segar, Douglas S, Gillam, Linda D, Gottdiener, John S, Hausnerova, Eva, Bruns, Denise E·1998·Journal of the American College of Cardiology

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The echocardiographic contrast-enhancing effects and safety profile of ALBUNEX (a suspension of air-filled albumin microspheres) were compared with the new contrast agent OPTISON (formerly FS069: a suspension of albumin microspheres containing the gas perfluoropropane) in 203 patients with inadequate noncontrast echocardiograms. BACKGROUND: The efficacy of ALBUNEX has been limited by its short duration of action. By using perfluoropropane instead of air within the microsphere, its duration of action is increased. METHODS: Each patient received ALBUNEX (0.8 and 0.22 mL/kg) and OPTISON (0.2, 0.5, 3.0, and 5.0 mL) on separate days a minimum of 48 hours apart. Echocardiograms were evaluated for increase in left ventricular (LV) endocardial border length, degree of LV opacification, number of LV endocardial border segments visualized, conversion from a nondiagnostic to a diagnostic echocardiogram, and duration of contrast enhancement. A thorough safety evaluation was conducted. RESULTS: Compared with ALBUNEX, OPTISON more significantly improved every measure of contrast enhancement. OPTISON increased well-visualized LV endocardial border length by 6.0+/-5.1, 6.9+/-5.4, 7.5+/-4.7, and 7.6+/-4.8 cm, respectively, for each of the four doses, compared with only 2.2+/-4.5 and 3.4+/-4.6 cm, respectively, for the two ALBUNEX doses (p < 0.001). 100% LV opacification was achieved in 61%, 73%, 87%, and 87% of the patients with the four doses of OPTISON, but in only 16% and 36% of the patients with the two ALBUNEX doses (p < 0.001). Conversion of nondiagnostic to diagnostic echocardiograms with contrast occurred in 74% of patients with the optimal dose of OPTISON (3.0 mL) compared with only 26% with the optimal dose of ALBUNEX (0.22 mL/kg) (p < 0.001). The duration of contrast effect was also significantly greater with OPTISON than with ALBUNEX. In a subset of patients with potentially poor transpulmonary transit of contrast (patients with chronic lung disease or dilated cardiomyopathy), OPTISON more significantly improved the same measures of contrast enhancement compared with ALBUNEX and did so to the same extent as in the overall population. Side effects were similar and transient with the two agents. CONCLUSION: OPTISON appears to be a safe, well-tolerated echocardiographic contrast agent that is superior to ALBUNEX.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0735-1097(98)00311-8

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 297

Metadata

Authors
Cohen, J. L., Cheirif, J., Segar, D. S., Gillam, L. D., Gottdiener, J. S., Hausnerova, E., & Bruns, D. E.
Venue
Journal of the American College of Cardiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1998-09
Volume
32
Issue
3
Pages
746-752
ISSN
0735-1097 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2213500965
Cited by
297
References
0
FWCI
23.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Improved left ventricular endocardial border delineation and opacification with OPTISON (FS069), a new echocardiographic contrast agent. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0735-1097(98)00311-8
The paper
Cohen, J. L., Cheirif, J., Segar, D. S., Gillam, L. D., Gottdiener, J. S., Hausnerova, E., & Bruns, D. E. (1998). Improved left ventricular endocardial border delineation and opacification with OPTISON (FS069), a new echocardiographic contrast agent. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0735-1097(98)00311-8

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.