Literature DB >> 16897145

Clinical implication of adenosine-stress cardiac magnetic resonance imaging as potential gatekeeper prior to invasive examination in patients with AHA/ACC class II indication for coronary angiography.

Guenter Pilz1, Peter Bernhardt, Markus Klos, Eman Ali, Michael Wild, Berthold Höfling.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Real world cardiology is faced with a low diagnostic yield of coronary angiography (CXA) in patients presenting with ACC/AHA class II CXA indication. Our aim was to analyze the clinical implication of a Cardiac MR (CMR) protocol including adenosine stress perfusion in this patient population. We examined whether CMR could enhance appropriate CXA indication and thus reduce the rate of pure diagnostic CXA. In addition, we compared the relative impact of CMR exam components (perfusion, function and viability assessment) in achieving this target.
METHODS: 176 patients were referred for CXA with class II indication. 171 underwent complete additional CMR exam in a 1.5-T whole body CMR-scanner for myocardial function, ischemia and viability prior to CXA. The routine protocol for assessment of CAD consisted of functional imaging (long and short axes), adenosine stress- and rest-perfusion in short axis orientation and "late enhancement" imaging in long and short axes. Images were analyzed by two independent and blinded investigators. Interobserver differences were resolved by a third reader.
RESULTS: There was a high association between CMR results and subsequent invasive findings (chi square for CMR perfusion deficit and stenosis >70% in CXA: 113.7, p<0.0001). 109 (63.7%) of our patients had relevant perfusion deficits as seen by CMR and matching coronary artery stenosis >70%. Four (2.3%) patients had false negative CMR findings. In 58 patients (33.9%) no relevant coronary artery stenosis could be observed, correctly predicted by CMR in 48 cases; in 10 (5.8%) patients CMR provided false positive results. Sensitivity of CMR to detect relevant CAD (>70% luminal narrowing) was 0.96, specificity 0.83, positive predictive value 0.92 and negative predictive value 0.92. Of the CMR components, perfusion deficit was the strongest independent predictor (odds ratio 132.3, p < 0.0001).
CONCLUSION: In a great number of patients being referred to cath lab with ACC/AHA class II indication for CXA, CMR provides a high accuracy for decision making regarding appropriateness of the invasive exam. CMR prior to CXA could substantially reduce pure diagnostic coronary angiographies in patients with intermediate probability for CAD, in our patient-cohort from approximately 34% to 6%. Further studies are warranted to identify rare false negative CMR results.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16897145     DOI: 10.1007/s00392-006-0422-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol        ISSN: 1861-0684            Impact factor:   5.460


  29 in total

1.  The economic consequences of available diagnostic and prognostic strategies for the evaluation of stable angina patients: an observational assessment of the value of precatheterization ischemia. Economics of Noninvasive Diagnosis (END) Multicenter Study Group.

Authors:  L J Shaw; R Hachamovitch; D S Berman; T H Marwick; M S Lauer; G V Heller; A E Iskandrian; K L Kesler; M I Travin; H C Lewin; R C Hendel; S Borges-Neto; D D Miller
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 24.094

Review 2.  Standardized myocardial segmentation and nomenclature for tomographic imaging of the heart. A statement for healthcare professionals from the Cardiac Imaging Committee of the Council on Clinical Cardiology of the American Heart Association.

Authors:  Manuel D Cerqueira; Neil J Weissman; Vasken Dilsizian; Alice K Jacobs; Sanjiv Kaul; Warren K Laskey; Dudley J Pennell; John A Rumberger; Thomas Ryan; Mario S Verani
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2002-01-29       Impact factor: 29.690

3.  Improved detection of coronary artery disease by stress perfusion cardiovascular magnetic resonance with the use of delayed enhancement infarction imaging.

Authors:  Igor Klem; John F Heitner; Dipan J Shah; Michael H Sketch; Victor Behar; Jonathan Weinsaft; Peter Cawley; Michele Parker; Michael Elliott; Robert M Judd; Raymond J Kim
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2006-03-27       Impact factor: 24.094

4.  Acute myocardial infarction: myocardial viability assessment in patients early thereafter comparison of contrast-enhanced MR imaging with resting (201)Tl SPECT. Single photon emission computed tomography.

Authors:  Kakuya Kitagawa; Hajime Sakuma; Tadanori Hirano; Shinya Okamoto; Katsutoshi Makino; Kan Takeda
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 11.105

5.  Yield of 5,536 diagnostic coronary arteriographies: results from a data registry.

Authors:  Jan Kyst Madsen; Jan Bech; Erik Jørgensen; Jens Kastrup; Henning Kelbaek; Kari Saunamäki
Journal:  Cardiology       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 1.869

6.  Prediction of necessity for coronary artery revascularization by adenosine contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Peter Bernhardt; Thomas Engels; Benny Levenson; Katrin Haase; Alexander Albrecht; Oliver Strohm
Journal:  Int J Cardiol       Date:  2005-11-04       Impact factor: 4.164

7.  Left ventricular measurements with cine and spin-echo MR imaging: a study of reproducibility with variance component analysis.

Authors:  P M Pattynama; H J Lamb; E A van der Velde; E E van der Wall; A de Roos
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1993-04       Impact factor: 11.105

8.  Assessment of myocardial perfusion in coronary artery disease by magnetic resonance: a comparison with positron emission tomography and coronary angiography.

Authors:  J Schwitter; D Nanz; S Kneifel; K Bertschinger; M Büchi; P R Knüsel; B Marincek; T F Lüscher; G K von Schulthess
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2001-05-08       Impact factor: 29.690

9.  Abnormal subendocardial perfusion in cardiac syndrome X detected by cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Jonathan R Panting; Peter D Gatehouse; Guang-Zhong Yang; Frank Grothues; David N Firmin; Peter Collins; Dudley J Pennell
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2002-06-20       Impact factor: 91.245

10.  Myocardial first-pass perfusion magnetic resonance imaging: a multicenter dose-ranging study.

Authors:  S D Wolff; J Schwitter; R Coulden; M G Friedrich; D A Bluemke; R W Biederman; E T Martin; A J Lansky; F Kashanian; T K F Foo; P E Licato; C R Comeau
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2004-08-02       Impact factor: 29.690

View more
  25 in total

1.  ACCF/ACR/AHA/NASCI/SCMR 2010 expert consensus document on cardiovascular magnetic resonance: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Task Force on Expert Consensus Documents.

Authors:  W Gregory Hundley; David A Bluemke; J Paul Finn; Scott D Flamm; Mark A Fogel; Matthias G Friedrich; Vincent B Ho; Michael Jerosch-Herold; Christopher M Kramer; Warren J Manning; Manesh Patel; Gerald M Pohost; Arthur E Stillman; Richard D White; Pamela K Woodard
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2010-05-17       Impact factor: 29.690

Review 2.  ACCF/ACR/AHA/NASCI/SCMR 2010 expert consensus document on cardiovascular magnetic resonance: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Task Force on Expert Consensus Documents.

Authors:  W Gregory Hundley; David A Bluemke; J Paul Finn; Scott D Flamm; Mark A Fogel; Matthias G Friedrich; Vincent B Ho; Michael Jerosch-Herold; Christopher M Kramer; Warren J Manning; Manesh Patel; Gerald M Pohost; Arthur E Stillman; Richard D White; Pamela K Woodard
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2010-06-08       Impact factor: 24.094

3.  Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging: an essential diagnostic aid in suspected myocardial re-infarction in a 40 year old woman.

Authors:  Günter Pilz; Peter Bernhardt; Elisabeth Harrer; Markus Klos; Berthold Höfling
Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol       Date:  2008-01-14       Impact factor: 5.460

Review 4.  Cardiac magnetic resonance stress testing: results and prognosis.

Authors:  Amedeo Chiribiri; Nuno Bettencourt; Eike Nagel
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 2.931

Review 5.  Assessment of myocardial ischemia with cardiovascular magnetic resonance.

Authors:  Bobak Heydari; Michael Jerosch-Herold; Raymond Y Kwong
Journal:  Prog Cardiovasc Dis       Date:  2011 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 8.194

6.  Beneficial effect of delayed reperfusion in ST elevation myocardial infarction despite transmural necrosis documented in cardiac magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Günter Pilz; Tobias Heer; Elisabeth Harrer; Markus Klos; Berthold Höfling
Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol       Date:  2010-02-10       Impact factor: 5.460

Review 7.  Pharmacological stress cardiovascular magnetic resonance.

Authors:  Runyawan Chotenimitkhun; W Gregory Hundley
Journal:  Postgrad Med       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 3.840

Review 8.  Cardiac MR perfusion imaging: where we are.

Authors:  Riccardo Marano; Luigi Natale; Amedeo Chiribiri; Federica Pirro; Valentina Silvestri; Giuseppe Coppola; Lorenzo Bonomo
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2014-07-17       Impact factor: 3.469

Review 9.  Meta-analysis of the diagnostic performance of stress perfusion cardiovascular magnetic resonance for detection of coronary artery disease.

Authors:  Michèle Hamon; Georges Fau; Guillaume Née; Javed Ehtisham; Rémy Morello; Martial Hamon
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Magn Reson       Date:  2010-05-19       Impact factor: 5.364

10.  Diagnostic performance of magnetic resonance first pass perfusion imaging is equally potent in female compared to male patients with coronary artery disease.

Authors:  Nico Merkle; Jochen Wöhrle; Thorsten Nusser; Olaf Grebe; Jochen Spiess; Jan Torzewski; Vinzenz Hombach
Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol       Date:  2009-09-11       Impact factor: 5.460

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.