BACKGROUND: Recent studies have demonstrated the significant prognostic value of stress cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) myocardial perfusion imaging. Apart from characterizing reversible perfusion defect (RevPD) from flow-limiting coronary stenosis, CMR late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) imaging is currently the most sensitive method for detecting subendocardial infarction (MI). We therefore tested the hypothesis that characterization of these 2 processes from coronary artery disease by CMR can provide complementary prognostic values. METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed CMR myocardial perfusion imaging followed by LGE imaging on 254 patients referred with symptoms of myocardial ischemia. At a median follow-up of 17 months, 49 cardiac events occurred, including 12 cardiac deaths, 16 acute MIs, and 21 cardiac hospitalizations. RevPD and LGE both maintained a >3-fold association with cardiac death or acute MI (death/MI) when adjusted for each other and for the effects of patient age and gender (adjusted hazard ratio, 3.31; P=0.02; and hazard ratio, 3.43; P=0.01, respectively). In patients without a history of MI who had negative RevPD, LGE presence was associated with a >11-fold hazards increase in death/MI. Patients with neither RevPD nor LGE had a 98.1% negative annual event rate for death/MI. For association with major adverse cardiac events, RevPD was the strongest multivariable variable in the best overall model (hazard ratio, 10.92; P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: CMR imaging provides robust risk stratification for patients who present with symptoms of ischemia. Characterization of RevPD and LGE by CMR provides strong and complementary prognostic implication for cardiac death or acute MI.
BACKGROUND: Recent studies have demonstrated the significant prognostic value of stress cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) myocardial perfusion imaging. Apart from characterizing reversible perfusion defect (RevPD) from flow-limiting coronary stenosis, CMR late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) imaging is currently the most sensitive method for detecting subendocardial infarction (MI). We therefore tested the hypothesis that characterization of these 2 processes from coronary artery disease by CMR can provide complementary prognostic values. METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed CMR myocardial perfusion imaging followed by LGE imaging on 254 patients referred with symptoms of myocardial ischemia. At a median follow-up of 17 months, 49 cardiac events occurred, including 12 cardiac deaths, 16 acute MIs, and 21 cardiac hospitalizations. RevPD and LGE both maintained a >3-fold association with cardiac death or acute MI (death/MI) when adjusted for each other and for the effects of patient age and gender (adjusted hazard ratio, 3.31; P=0.02; and hazard ratio, 3.43; P=0.01, respectively). In patients without a history of MI who had negative RevPD, LGE presence was associated with a >11-fold hazards increase in death/MI. Patients with neither RevPD nor LGE had a 98.1% negative annual event rate for death/MI. For association with major adverse cardiac events, RevPD was the strongest multivariable variable in the best overall model (hazard ratio, 10.92; P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: CMR imaging provides robust risk stratification for patients who present with symptoms of ischemia. Characterization of RevPD and LGE by CMR provides strong and complementary prognostic implication for cardiac death or acute MI.
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
Authors: Manuel D Cerqueira; Neil J Weissman; Vasken Dilsizian; Alice K Jacobs; Sanjiv Kaul; Waren K Laskey; Dudley J Pennell; John A Rumberger; Thomas Ryan; Mario S Verani Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2002-02 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: O P Simonetti; R J Kim; D S Fieno; H B Hillenbrand; E Wu; J M Bundy; J P Finn; R M Judd Journal: Radiology Date: 2001-01 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: Carol J Salton; Michael L Chuang; Christopher J O'Donnell; Michelle J Kupka; Martin G Larson; Kraig V Kissinger; Robert R Edelman; Daniel Levy; Warren J Manning Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2002-03-20 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Raymond J Gibbons; Jonathan Abrams; Kanu Chatterjee; Jennifer Daley; Prakash C Deedwania; John S Douglas; T Bruce Ferguson; Stephan D Fihn; Theodore D Fraker; Julius M Gardin; Robert A O'Rourke; Richard C Pasternak; Sankey V Williams Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2003-01-01 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Otavio R Coelho-Filho; Luciana F Seabra; François-Pierre Mongeon; Shuaib M Abdullah; Sanjeev A Francis; Ron Blankstein; Marcelo F Di Carli; Michael Jerosch-Herold; Raymond Y Kwong Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2011-08
Authors: Dennis T L Wong; James D Richardson; Rishi Puri; Adam J Nelson; Angela G Bertaso; Karen S L Teo; Matthew I Worthley; Stephen G Worthley Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2012-03-25 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Ravi Shah; Bobak Heydari; Otavio Coelho-Filho; Venkatesh L Murthy; Siddique Abbasi; Jiazhuo H Feng; Michael Pencina; Tomas G Neilan; Judith L Meadows; Sanjeev Francis; Ron Blankstein; Michael Steigner; Marcelo di Carli; Michael Jerosch-Herold; Raymond Y Kwong Journal: Circulation Date: 2013-06-26 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Neal K Lakdawala; Jens Jakob Thune; Barry J Maron; Allison L Cirino; Ole Havndrup; Henning Bundgaard; Michael Christiansen; Christian M Carlsen; Jean-François Dorval; Raymond Y Kwong; Steven D Colan; Lars V Køber; Carolyn Y Ho Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2011-09-21 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Jonathan D Kochav; Peter M Okin; Sean Wilson; Anika Afroz; Alfredo Renilla; Jonathan W Weinsaft Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2013-04-20 Impact factor: 2.778