Study to Determine Safety and Dosage of OPTISON in Pediatric Participants

Visualization of each of the 12 segments of the LV wall in standard A4C and A2C views were measured by the qualitative EBD visualization scale: score 0 =no visualization of the LV endocardial border; 1 =poor visualization; 2 =fair visualization; 3 =good/optimal visualization. The total LV EBD score was calculated as the sum of the individual scores assigned to each of the 12 LV wall segment and the total score ranged from 0 (no visualization of the LV endocardial border) to 36 (good/optimal visualization). A higher score indicated better visualization. The total score of qualitative EBD visualization scale were reported by reader (independent blinded), non-contrast and dose levels.

An Adverse Event (AE) was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant administered a pharmaceutical product and which did not necessarily had to have causal relationship with treatment. TEAEs were defined as AEs that starts or worsens at or after the time of first dosing of OPTISON.

Systolic and diastolic blood pressure were measured from the arm contra-lateral to the site of OPTISON administration whenever possible and before measurement, participants rested for at least 5 minutes (if possible).

Before heart rate was measured, participants rested for at least 5 minutes (if possible).

Before respiratory rate was measured, participants rested for at least 5 minutes (if possible).

Oxygen saturation was measured by pulse oximetry. Before oxygen saturation was measured, participants rested for at least 5 minutes (if possible).

Participants underwent assessments including general appearance, respiratory, cardiovascular and neurological (motor function, level of consciousness, sensory function) examination. Any abnormal clinically significant physical examination findings were based on investigator decision.

Change from baseline in PR, QRS, QT, Bazett's formula corrected QT (QTcB), Fridericia's formula corrected QT (QTcF) and RR intervals expressed in millisecond (ms) were reported.

LVO peak contrast intensity was determined by readers (independent blinded) using a categorical scale as None, Low, Medium, High or Blooming, where, None = Absence of contrast signal; Low = Limited capacity to make a diagnostic assessment; Presence of contrast signal does not improve diagnostic interpretability to a great degree; Medium = Good capacity to make a diagnostic assessment; Contrast signal facilitates diagnostic interpretability to a good degree; High = Optimal capacity to make a diagnostic assessment; Contrast signal facilitates diagnostic interpretability to a high degree; Blooming = Oversaturation of the signal disrupts diagnostic interpretability. Tissue boundaries become challenging to delineate. There may be excessive acoustic shadowing in the far-field of the image. Number of participants by degree of LVO assessed by visual peak contrast intensity was presented by readers and dose levels.

Peak LV contrast filling for LVO was categorized as: 0 = none (0 percent [%] filling); 1 = faint (around 33% filling); 2 = intermediate (around 67% filling); 3 = full (100% filling) and data were presented by readers (independent blinded) and dose levels.

Contrast enhancement duration was determined from the time the contrast appeared in the LV to the time the contrast almost dissipated from the left chamber. 3 independent blinded reader performed evaluation.

Diagnostic confidence for the assessment of LV EBD and wall motion was scored for non-contrast and OPTISON-enhanced echocardiographic acquisitions separately using a 4-point scale which ranged from ranged 0 to 4, where 0 = no confidence, 1 = low confidence, 2 = moderate confidence, 3 = high confidence. A higher score indicates better confidence level. Data were presented by reader (independent blinded), non-contrast and dose levels.

Diagnostic confidence for the evaluation of LVEF was calculated using the formula: (end diastole volume - end systole volume)/(end diastole volume) was scored for non-contrast and OPTISON-enhanced echocardiographic acquisitions separately using a 4-point scale which ranged from 0 to 3, where 0 = no confidence, 1 = low confidence, 2 = moderate confidence, 3 = high confidence. A higher score indicates better confidence level. Data were presented by reader (independent blinded), non-contrast and dose levels.