BACKGROUND: The extent of the peri-infarct zone by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been related to all-cause mortality in patients with coronary artery disease. This relationship may result from arrhythmogenesis in the infarct border. However, the relationship between tissue heterogeneity in the infarct periphery and arrhythmic substrate has not been investigated. In the present study, we quantify myocardial infarct heterogeneity by contrast-enhanced MRI and relate it to an electrophysiological marker of arrhythmic substrate in patients with left ventricular (LV) systolic dysfunction undergoing prophylactic implantable cardioverter defibrillator placement. METHODS AND RESULTS: Before implantable cardioverter defibrillator implantation for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death, 47 patients underwent cine and contrast-enhanced MRI to measure LV function, volumes, mass, and infarct size. A method for quantifying the heterogeneous infarct periphery and the denser infarct core is described. MRI indices were related to inducibility of sustained monomorphic ventricular tachycardia during electrophysiological or device testing. For the noninducible versus inducible patients, LV ejection fraction (30+/-10% versus 29+/-7%, P=0.79), LV end-diastolic volume (220+/-70 versus 228+/-57 mL, P=0.68), and infarct size by standard contrast-enhanced MRI definitions (P=NS) were similar. Quantification of tissue heterogeneity at the infarct periphery was strongly associated with inducibility for monomorphic ventricular tachycardia (noninducible versus inducible: 13+/-9 versus 19+/-8 g, P=0.015) and was the single significant factor in a stepwise logistic regression. CONCLUSIONS: Tissue heterogeneity is present and quantifiable within human infarcts. More extensive tissue heterogeneity correlates with increased ventricular irritability by programmed electrical stimulation. These findings support the hypothesis that anatomic tissue heterogeneity increases susceptibility to ventricular arrhythmias in patients with prior myocardial infarction and LV dysfunction.
BACKGROUND: The extent of the peri-infarct zone by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been related to all-cause mortality in patients with coronary artery disease. This relationship may result from arrhythmogenesis in the infarct border. However, the relationship between tissue heterogeneity in the infarct periphery and arrhythmic substrate has not been investigated. In the present study, we quantify myocardial infarct heterogeneity by contrast-enhanced MRI and relate it to an electrophysiological marker of arrhythmic substrate in patients with left ventricular (LV) systolic dysfunction undergoing prophylactic implantable cardioverter defibrillator placement. METHODS AND RESULTS: Before implantable cardioverter defibrillator implantation for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death, 47 patients underwent cine and contrast-enhanced MRI to measure LV function, volumes, mass, and infarct size. A method for quantifying the heterogeneous infarct periphery and the denser infarct core is described. MRI indices were related to inducibility of sustained monomorphic ventricular tachycardia during electrophysiological or device testing. For the noninducible versus inducible patients, LV ejection fraction (30+/-10% versus 29+/-7%, P=0.79), LV end-diastolic volume (220+/-70 versus 228+/-57 mL, P=0.68), and infarct size by standard contrast-enhanced MRI definitions (P=NS) were similar. Quantification of tissue heterogeneity at the infarct periphery was strongly associated with inducibility for monomorphic ventricular tachycardia (noninducible versus inducible: 13+/-9 versus 19+/-8 g, P=0.015) and was the single significant factor in a stepwise logistic regression. CONCLUSIONS: Tissue heterogeneity is present and quantifiable within humaninfarcts. More extensive tissue heterogeneity correlates with increased ventricular irritability by programmed electrical stimulation. These findings support the hypothesis that anatomic tissue heterogeneity increases susceptibility to ventricular arrhythmias in patients with prior myocardial infarction and LV dysfunction.
Authors: Arthur J Moss; Wojciech Zareba; W Jackson Hall; Helmut Klein; David J Wilber; David S Cannom; James P Daubert; Steven L Higgins; Mary W Brown; Mark L Andrews Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2002-03-19 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: R J Kim; D S Fieno; T B Parrish; K Harris; E L Chen; O Simonetti; J Bundy; J P Finn; F J Klocke; R M Judd Journal: Circulation Date: 1999-11-09 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: H Arheden; M Saeed; C B Higgins; D W Gao; P C Ursell; J Bremerich; R Wyttenbach; M W Dae; M F Wendland Journal: Radiology Date: 2000-05 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: R J Kim; E Wu; A Rafael; E L Chen; M A Parker; O Simonetti; F J Klocke; R O Bonow; R M Judd Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2000-11-16 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Corinna B Brunckhorst; Etienne Delacretaz; Kyoko Soejima; William H Maisel; Peter L Friedman; William G Stevenson Journal: Circulation Date: 2004-08-02 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Katherine C Wu; Gary Gerstenblith; Eliseo Guallar; Joseph E Marine; Darshan Dalal; Alan Cheng; Eduardo Marbán; João A C Lima; Gordon F Tomaselli; Robert G Weiss Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2012-01-20 Impact factor: 7.792
Authors: Stephanie A M Knippenberg; Galen S Wagner; Joey F A Ubachs; Anton Gorgels; Erik Hedström; Håkan Arheden; Henrik Engblom Journal: Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol Date: 2010-07 Impact factor: 1.468
Authors: Stefan de Haan; Mischa T Rijnierse; Hendrik J Harms; Hein J Verberne; Adriaan A Lammertsma; Marc C Huisman; Albert D Windhorst; Albert C van Rossum; Cornelis P Allaart; Paul Knaapen Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2015-11-09 Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Jose C Quinaglia e Silva; Otavio Rizzi Coelho-Filho; Joalbo M Andrade; Thiago Quinaglia; Rodrigo G P Modolo; Breno O Almeida; Rob J van der Geest; Michael Jerosch-Herold; Otavio Rizzi Coelho; Andrei C Sposito Journal: Inflammation Date: 2014-06 Impact factor: 4.092