OBJECTIVES: The major aim of this study is to test the hypothesis that stress cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging can provide robust prognostic value in women presenting with suspected ischemia, to the same extent as in men. BACKGROUND: Compelling evidence indicates that women with coronary artery disease (CAD) experience worse outcomes than men owing to a lack of early diagnosis and management. Numerous clinical studies have shown that stress CMR detects evidence of myocardial ischemia and infarction at high accuracy. Compared to nuclear scintigraphy, CMR is free of ionizing radiation, has high spatial resolution for imaging small hearts, and overcomes breast attenuation artifacts, which are substantial advantages when imaging women for CAD. METHODS: We performed stress CMR in 405 patients (168 women, mean age 58 ± 14 years) referred for ischemia assessment. CMR techniques included cine cardiac function, perfusion imaging during vasodilating stress, and late gadolinium enhancement imaging. All patients were followed for major adverse cardiac events (MACE). RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 30 months, MACE occurred in 36 patients (9%) including 21 cardiac deaths and 15 acute myocardial infarctions. In women, CMR evidence of ischemia (ISCHEMIA) demonstrated strong association with MACE (unadjusted hazard ratio: 49.9, p < 0.0001). While women with ISCHEMIA(+) had an annual MACE rate of 15%, women with ISCHEMIA(-) had very low annual MACE rate (0.3%), which was not statistically different from the low annual MACE rate in men with ISCHEMIA(-) (1.1%). CMR myocardial ischemia score was the strongest multivariable predictor of MACE in this cohort, for both women and men, indicating robust cardiac prognostication regardless of sex. CONCLUSIONS: In addition to avoiding exposure to ionizing radiation, stress CMR myocardial perfusion imaging is an effective and robust risk-stratifying tool for patients of either sex presenting with possible ischemia.
OBJECTIVES: The major aim of this study is to test the hypothesis that stress cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging can provide robust prognostic value in women presenting with suspected ischemia, to the same extent as in men. BACKGROUND: Compelling evidence indicates that women with coronary artery disease (CAD) experience worse outcomes than men owing to a lack of early diagnosis and management. Numerous clinical studies have shown that stress CMR detects evidence of myocardial ischemia and infarction at high accuracy. Compared to nuclear scintigraphy, CMR is free of ionizing radiation, has high spatial resolution for imaging small hearts, and overcomes breast attenuation artifacts, which are substantial advantages when imaging women for CAD. METHODS: We performed stress CMR in 405 patients (168 women, mean age 58 ± 14 years) referred for ischemia assessment. CMR techniques included cine cardiac function, perfusion imaging during vasodilating stress, and late gadolinium enhancement imaging. All patients were followed for major adverse cardiac events (MACE). RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 30 months, MACE occurred in 36 patients (9%) including 21 cardiac deaths and 15 acute myocardial infarctions. In women, CMR evidence of ischemia (ISCHEMIA) demonstrated strong association with MACE (unadjusted hazard ratio: 49.9, p < 0.0001). While women with ISCHEMIA(+) had an annual MACE rate of 15%, women with ISCHEMIA(-) had very low annual MACE rate (0.3%), which was not statistically different from the low annual MACE rate in men with ISCHEMIA(-) (1.1%). CMR myocardial ischemia score was the strongest multivariable predictor of MACE in this cohort, for both women and men, indicating robust cardiac prognostication regardless of sex. CONCLUSIONS: In addition to avoiding exposure to ionizing radiation, stress CMR myocardial perfusion imaging is an effective and robust risk-stratifying tool for patients of either sex presenting with possible ischemia.
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: Emelia J Benjamin; Sidney C Smith; Richard S Cooper; Martha N Hill; Russell V Luepker Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2002-08-21 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Daniel S Berman; Xingping Kang; Sean W Hayes; John D Friedman; Ishac Cohen; Aiden Abidov; Leslee J Shaw; Aman M Amanullah; Guido Germano; Rory Hachamovitch Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2003-04-02 Impact factor: 24.094
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: Kevin Steel; Ryan Broderick; Vijay Gandla; Eric Larose; Frederick Resnic; Michael Jerosch-Herold; Kenneth A Brown; Raymond Y Kwong Journal: Circulation Date: 2009-09-21 Impact factor: 29.690
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: Aram V Chobanian; George L Bakris; Henry R Black; William C Cushman; Lee A Green; Joseph L Izzo; Daniel W Jones; Barry J Materson; Suzanne Oparil; Jackson T Wright; Edward J Roccella Journal: Hypertension Date: 2003-12-01 Impact factor: 10.190
Authors: Bernhard L Gerber; Subha V Raman; Krishna Nayak; Frederick H Epstein; Pedro Ferreira; Leon Axel; Dara L Kraitchman Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Date: 2008-04-28 Impact factor: 5.364
Authors: Michael Becker; Anne Hundemer; Christian Zwicker; Ertunc Altiok; Thomas Krohn; Felix M Mottaghy; Christina Lente; Malte Kelm; Nikolaus Marx; Rainer Hoffmann Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2014-11-01 Impact factor: 5.460
Authors: Sawan Jalnapurkar; Parham Zarrini; Puja K Mehta; Louise E J Thomson; Megha Agarwal; Bruce A Samuels; Chrisandra L Shufelt; Jo-Ann Eastwood; Daniel Berman; Noel Bairey Merz; Margo B Minissian Journal: J Radiol Nurs Date: 2017-08-30
Authors: Lauren A Baldassarre; Subha V Raman; James K Min; Jennifer H Mieres; Martha Gulati; Nanette K Wenger; Thomas H Marwick; Chiara Bucciarelli-Ducci; C Noel Bairey Merz; Dipti Itchhaporia; Keith C Ferdinand; Carl J Pepine; Mary Norine Walsh; Jagat Narula; Leslee J Shaw Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2016-04
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: Gianluca Pontone; Daniele Andreini; Erika Bertella; Monica Loguercio; Marco Guglielmo; Andrea Baggiano; Giovanni Donato Aquaro; Saima Mushtaq; Sara Salerni; Paola Gripari; Carmen Rossi; Chiara Segurini; Edoardo Conte; Virginia Beltrama; Marta Giovannardi; Fabrizio Veglia; Andrea Igoren Guaricci; Antonio L Bartorelli; Piergiuseppe Agostoni; Mauro Pepi; Pier Giorgio Masci Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2015-10-29 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Patrick Krumm; Stefanie Mangold; Sergios Gatidis; Konstantin Nikolaou; Felix Nensa; Fabian Bamberg; Christian la Fougère Journal: Jpn J Radiol Date: 2018-03-10 Impact factor: 2.374
Authors: Ravi V Shah; Siddique A Abbasi; Bobak Heydari; Hoshang Farhad; John A Dodson; Jessie P Bakker; Roy M John; Aristidis Veves; Atul Malhotra; Ron Blankstein; Michael Jerosch-Herold; Raymond Y Kwong; Tomas G Neilan Journal: Am Heart J Date: 2014-01-15 Impact factor: 4.749