OBJECTIVES: Our aim was to assess the predictive value of myocardial infarct size assessed with late gadolinium-enhanced (LGE) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in medically treated patients with chronic myocardial infarction relative to contractile reserve on low-dose dobutamine magnetic resonance (DSMR) for long-term event-free survival. BACKGROUND: Information on the relative merits of scar tissue and contractile reserve to predict long-term prognosis in patients with chronic myocardial infarction is lacking. METHODS: A total of 177 patients with known coronary artery disease and scar tissue on LGE MRI were enrolled. Left ventricular (LV) functional parameters at rest and during low-dose DSMR were assessed, and the wall motion score index was calculated. RESULTS: Eleven patients (6.2%) suffered an event during follow-up (average 20.3 months). Infarct size was a stronger predictor of events than LV ejection fraction and LV volumes at rest and during low-dose DSMR. Myocardial infarct size was used to separate patients at high risk (spatial extent > or =6 segments, n = 98) from those at low risk (spatial extent <6 segments, n = 79) for mortality. In the subgroup of patients at high risk, transmurality of infarct was not a predictor of events. However, the presence of contractile reserve (n = 63) was associated with a significantly higher number of events (12.7%) compared with no change in wall motion score index (6.7%; n = 15; p = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: Myocardial infarct size on LGE MRI is a stronger predictor of clinical outcome than contractile reserve in medically treated patients with myocardial infarction. In patients with large myocardial scar, the presence of contractile reserve is more important for the prediction of events than scar tissue.
OBJECTIVES: Our aim was to assess the predictive value of myocardial infarct size assessed with late gadolinium-enhanced (LGE) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in medically treated patients with chronic myocardial infarction relative to contractile reserve on low-dose dobutamine magnetic resonance (DSMR) for long-term event-free survival. BACKGROUND: Information on the relative merits of scar tissue and contractile reserve to predict long-term prognosis in patients with chronic myocardial infarction is lacking. METHODS: A total of 177 patients with known coronary artery disease and scar tissue on LGE MRI were enrolled. Left ventricular (LV) functional parameters at rest and during low-dose DSMR were assessed, and the wall motion score index was calculated. RESULTS: Eleven patients (6.2%) suffered an event during follow-up (average 20.3 months). Infarct size was a stronger predictor of events than LV ejection fraction and LV volumes at rest and during low-dose DSMR. Myocardial infarct size was used to separate patients at high risk (spatial extent > or =6 segments, n = 98) from those at low risk (spatial extent <6 segments, n = 79) for mortality. In the subgroup of patients at high risk, transmurality of infarct was not a predictor of events. However, the presence of contractile reserve (n = 63) was associated with a significantly higher number of events (12.7%) compared with no change in wall motion score index (6.7%; n = 15; p = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS:Myocardial infarct size on LGE MRI is a stronger predictor of clinical outcome than contractile reserve in medically treated patients with myocardial infarction. In patients with large myocardial scar, the presence of contractile reserve is more important for the prediction of events than scar tissue.
Authors: Dominik Buckert; Sebastian Kelle; Sebastian Buss; Grigorios Korosoglou; Rolf Gebker; Ralf Birkemeyer; Wolfgang Rottbauer; Hugo Katus; Burkert Pieske; Peter Bernhardt Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2016-10-13 Impact factor: 5.460
Authors: Mortimer Korf-Klingebiel; Marc R Reboll; Stefanie Klede; Torben Brod; Andreas Pich; Felix Polten; L Christian Napp; Johann Bauersachs; Arnold Ganser; Eva Brinkmann; Ines Reimann; Tibor Kempf; Hans W Niessen; Jacques Mizrahi; Hans-Joachim Schönfeld; Antonio Iglesias; Maria Bobadilla; Yong Wang; Kai C Wollert Journal: Nat Med Date: 2015-01-12 Impact factor: 53.440
Authors: Gert Klug; Agnes Mayr; Johannes Mair; Michael Schocke; Michael Nocker; Thomas Trieb; Werner Jaschke; Otmar Pachinger; Bernhard Metzler Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2011-01-04 Impact factor: 5.460
Authors: Eric G Schmuck; Jill M Koch; Timothy A Hacker; Charles R Hatt; Michael T Tomkowiak; Karl K Vigen; Nicholas Hendren; Cathlyn Leitzke; Ying-Qi Zhao; Zhanhai Li; John M Centanni; Derek J Hei; Denise Schwahn; Jaehyup Kim; Peiman Hematti; Amish N Raval Journal: J Cardiovasc Transl Res Date: 2015-09-15 Impact factor: 4.132
Authors: Arthur E Stillman; Matthijs Oudkerk; David A Bluemke; Menko Jan de Boer; Jens Bremerich; Ernest V Garcia; Matthias Gutberlet; Pim van der Harst; W Gregory Hundley; Michael Jerosch-Herold; Dirkjan Kuijpers; Raymond Y Kwong; Eike Nagel; Stamatios Lerakis; John Oshinski; Jean-François Paul; Riemer H J A Slart; Vinod Thourani; Rozemarijn Vliegenthart; Bernd J Wintersperger Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2018-03-19 Impact factor: 2.357