BACKGROUND: The area at risk (AAR) is a key determinant of myocardial infarction (MI) size. We investigated whether magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) measurement of AAR would be correlated with an angiographic AAR risk score in patients with acute MI. METHODS AND RESULTS: Bright-blood, T2-prepared, steady-state, free-precession MRI was used to depict the AAR in 50 consecutive acute MI patients, whereas infarct size was measured on gadolinium late-contrast-enhancement images. AAR was also estimated by the APPROACH and DUKE angiographic jeopardy scores and ST-segment elevation score. Myocardial salvage was calculated as AAR minus infarct size. Results are mean ± SD unless specified otherwise. Patients were 61 ± 12 years of age, 76% had an ST-segment elevation MI, and 20% had a prior MI. All underwent MRI 4 ± 2 days after initial presentation. The relation between MRI and the APPROACH angiographic estimates of AAR was similar (overall size relative to left ventricular mass was 32 ± 12% vs 30 ± 12%, respectively, P=0.33), correlated well (r = 0.78, P < 0.0001), and had a 2.5% bias on Bland-Altman analysis. The DUKE jeopardy score underestimated AAR relative to infarct size and was correlated less well with MRI (r = 0.39, P = 0.0055). ST-segment elevation score underestimated infarct size in 19 subjects (50%) and was not correlated with MRI (r = 0.27, P = 0.06). Myocardial salvage varied according to Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction flow grade at the end of angiography/percutaneous coronary intervention (P = 0.04), and Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction flow grade was a univariable predictor of myocardial salvage (P = 0.011). In multivariable analyses, infarct size was predicted by T2-prepared, steady-state, free-precession MRI (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: T2-prepared, steady-state, free-precession MRI delineates the AAR and enables estimation of myocardial salvage when coupled with a measurement of infarct size.
BACKGROUND: The area at risk (AAR) is a key determinant of myocardial infarction (MI) size. We investigated whether magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) measurement of AAR would be correlated with an angiographic AAR risk score in patients with acute MI. METHODS AND RESULTS: Bright-blood, T2-prepared, steady-state, free-precession MRI was used to depict the AAR in 50 consecutive acute MI patients, whereas infarct size was measured on gadolinium late-contrast-enhancement images. AAR was also estimated by the APPROACH and DUKE angiographic jeopardy scores and ST-segment elevation score. Myocardial salvage was calculated as AAR minus infarct size. Results are mean ± SD unless specified otherwise. Patients were 61 ± 12 years of age, 76% had an ST-segment elevation MI, and 20% had a prior MI. All underwent MRI 4 ± 2 days after initial presentation. The relation between MRI and the APPROACH angiographic estimates of AAR was similar (overall size relative to left ventricular mass was 32 ± 12% vs 30 ± 12%, respectively, P=0.33), correlated well (r = 0.78, P < 0.0001), and had a 2.5% bias on Bland-Altman analysis. The DUKE jeopardy score underestimated AAR relative to infarct size and was correlated less well with MRI (r = 0.39, P = 0.0055). ST-segment elevation score underestimated infarct size in 19 subjects (50%) and was not correlated with MRI (r = 0.27, P = 0.06). Myocardial salvage varied according to Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction flow grade at the end of angiography/percutaneous coronary intervention (P = 0.04), and Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction flow grade was a univariable predictor of myocardial salvage (P = 0.011). In multivariable analyses, infarct size was predicted by T2-prepared, steady-state, free-precession MRI (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: T2-prepared, steady-state, free-precession MRI delineates the AAR and enables estimation of myocardial salvage when coupled with a measurement of infarct size.
Authors: Peter Kellman; Christophe Chefd'hotel; Christine H Lorenz; Christine Mancini; Andrew E Arai; Elliot R McVeigh Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2008-04 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Colin Berry; Kanarath P Balachandran; Philippe L L'Allier; Jacques Lespérance; Raoul Bonan; Keith G Oldroyd Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2007-01-11 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: M M Graham; P D Faris; W A Ghali; P D Galbraith; C M Norris; J T Badry; L B Mitchell; M J Curtis; M L Knudtson Journal: Am Heart J Date: 2001-08 Impact factor: 4.749
Authors: Y Birnbaum; C Maynard; S Wolfe; A Mager; B Strasberg; E Rechavia; K Gates; G S Wagner Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 1999-09-01 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: J S Hochman; L A Sleeper; J G Webb; T A Sanborn; H D White; J D Talley; C E Buller; A K Jacobs; J N Slater; J Col; S M McKinlay; T H LeJemtel Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1999-08-26 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Elliott M. Antman; Daniel T. Anbe; Paul Wayne Armstrong; Eric R. Bates; Lee A. Green; Mary Hand; Judith S. Hochman; Harlan M. Krumholz; Frederick G. Kushner; Gervasio A. Lamas; Charles J. Mullany; Joseph P. Ornato; David L. Pearle; Michael A. Sloan; Sidney C. Smith; Joseph S. Alpert; Jeffrey L. Anderson; David P. Faxon; Valentin Fuster; Raymond J. Gibbons; Gabriel Gregoratos; Jonathan L. Halperin; Loren F. Hiratzka; Sharon Ann Hunt; Alice K. Jacobs; Joseph P. Ornato Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2004-08-04 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: R M Califf; H R Phillips; M C Hindman; D B Mark; K L Lee; V S Behar; R A Johnson; D B Pryor; R A Rosati; G S Wagner Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 1985-05 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Shuning Huang; Howard H Chen; Hushan Yuan; Guangping Dai; Daniel T Schuhle; Choukri Mekkaoui; Soeun Ngoy; Ronglih Liao; Peter Caravan; Lee Josephson; David E Sosnovik Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2011-08-11 Impact factor: 7.792
Authors: Henry Chang; James K Min; Sunil V Rao; Manesh R Patel; Orlando P Simonetti; Giuseppe Ambrosio; Subha V Raman Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2012-07 Impact factor: 7.792