CONTEXT: Unrecognized myocardial infarction (MI) is prognostically important. Electrocardiography (ECG) has limited sensitivity for detecting unrecognized MI (UMI). OBJECTIVE: Determine prevalence and mortality risk for UMI detected by cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging or ECG among older individuals. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: ICELAND MI is a cohort substudy of the Age, Gene/Environment Susceptibility-Reykjavik Study (enrollment January 2004-January 2007) using ECG or CMR to detect UMI. From a community-dwelling cohort of older individuals in Iceland, data for 936 participants aged 67 to 93 years were analyzed, including 670 who were randomly selected and 266 with diabetes. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Prevalence and mortality of MI through September 1, 2011. Results reported with 95% confidence limits and net reclassification improvement (NRI). RESULTS: Of 936 participants, 91 had recognized MI (RMI) (9.7%; 95% CI, 8% to 12%), and 157 had UMI detected by CMR (17%; 95% CI, 14% to 19%), which was more prevalent than the 46 UMI detected by ECG (5%; 95% CI, 4% to 6%; P < .001). Participants with diabetes (n = 337) had more UMI detected by CMR than by ECG (n = 72; 21%; 95% CI, 17% to 26%, vs n = 15; 4%; 95% CI, 2% to 7%; P < .001). Unrecognized MI by CMR was associated with atherosclerosis risk factors, coronary calcium, coronary revascularization, and peripheral vascular disease. Over a median of 6.4 years, 30 of 91 participants (33%; 95% CI, 23% to 43%) with RMI died, and 44 of 157 participants (28%; 95% CI, 21% to 35%) with UMI died, both higher rates than the 119 of 688 participants (17%; 95% CI, 15% to 20%) with no MI who died. Unrecognized MI by CMR improved risk stratification for mortality over RMI (NRI, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.16 to 0.53). Adjusting for age, sex, diabetes, and RMI, UMI by CMR remained associated with mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 1.45; 95% CI, 1.02 to 2.06, absolute risk increase [ARI], 8%) and significantly improved risk stratification for mortality (NRI, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.01 to 0.31), but UMI by ECG did not (HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.45 to 1.73; ARI, -2%; NRI, -0.05; 95% CI, -0.17 to 0.05). Compared with those with RMI, participants with UMI by CMR used cardiac medications such as statins less often (36%; 95% CI, 28% to 43%, or 56/157, vs 73%; 95% CI, 63% to 82%, or 66/91; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: In a community-based cohort of older individuals, the prevalence of UMI by CMR was higher than the prevalence of RMI and was associated with increased mortality risk. In contrast, UMI by ECG prevalence was lower than that of RMI and was not associated with increased mortality risk. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01322568.
CONTEXT: Unrecognized myocardial infarction (MI) is prognostically important. Electrocardiography (ECG) has limited sensitivity for detecting unrecognized MI (UMI). OBJECTIVE: Determine prevalence and mortality risk for UMI detected by cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging or ECG among older individuals. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: ICELAND MI is a cohort substudy of the Age, Gene/Environment Susceptibility-Reykjavik Study (enrollment January 2004-January 2007) using ECG or CMR to detect UMI. From a community-dwelling cohort of older individuals in Iceland, data for 936 participants aged 67 to 93 years were analyzed, including 670 who were randomly selected and 266 with diabetes. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Prevalence and mortality of MI through September 1, 2011. Results reported with 95% confidence limits and net reclassification improvement (NRI). RESULTS: Of 936 participants, 91 had recognized MI (RMI) (9.7%; 95% CI, 8% to 12%), and 157 had UMI detected by CMR (17%; 95% CI, 14% to 19%), which was more prevalent than the 46 UMI detected by ECG (5%; 95% CI, 4% to 6%; P < .001). Participants with diabetes (n = 337) had more UMI detected by CMR than by ECG (n = 72; 21%; 95% CI, 17% to 26%, vs n = 15; 4%; 95% CI, 2% to 7%; P < .001). Unrecognized MI by CMR was associated with atherosclerosis risk factors, coronary calcium, coronary revascularization, and peripheral vascular disease. Over a median of 6.4 years, 30 of 91 participants (33%; 95% CI, 23% to 43%) with RMI died, and 44 of 157 participants (28%; 95% CI, 21% to 35%) with UMI died, both higher rates than the 119 of 688 participants (17%; 95% CI, 15% to 20%) with no MI who died. Unrecognized MI by CMR improved risk stratification for mortality over RMI (NRI, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.16 to 0.53). Adjusting for age, sex, diabetes, and RMI, UMI by CMR remained associated with mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 1.45; 95% CI, 1.02 to 2.06, absolute risk increase [ARI], 8%) and significantly improved risk stratification for mortality (NRI, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.01 to 0.31), but UMI by ECG did not (HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.45 to 1.73; ARI, -2%; NRI, -0.05; 95% CI, -0.17 to 0.05). Compared with those with RMI, participants with UMI by CMR used cardiac medications such as statins less often (36%; 95% CI, 28% to 43%, or 56/157, vs 73%; 95% CI, 63% to 82%, or 66/91; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: In a community-based cohort of older individuals, the prevalence of UMI by CMR was higher than the prevalence of RMI and was associated with increased mortality risk. In contrast, UMI by ECG prevalence was lower than that of RMI and was not associated with increased mortality risk. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01322568.
Authors: Christoph Klein; Stephan G Nekolla; Frank M Bengel; Mitsuru Momose; Andrea Sammer; Felix Haas; Bernhard Schnackenburg; Wolfram Delius; Harald Mudra; Dieter Wolfram; Markus Schwaiger Journal: Circulation Date: 2002-01-15 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Robert J Burns; Raymond J Gibbons; Qilong Yi; Robin S Roberts; Todd D Miller; Gary L Schaer; Jeffrey L Anderson; Salim Yusuf Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2002-01-02 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Charlotte Ebeling Barbier; Ruta Nylander; Raquel Themudo; Håkan Ahlström; Lars Lind; Elna-Marie Larsson; Tomas Bjerner; Lars Johansson Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2011-09-20 Impact factor: 24.094
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: 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: Lori L Boland; Aaron R Folsom; Paul D Sorlie; Herman A Taylor; Wayne D Rosamond; Lloyd E Chambless; Lawton S Cooper Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2002-11-01 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Tomas G Neilan; Ravi V Shah; Siddique A Abbasi; Hoshang Farhad; John D Groarke; John A Dodson; Otavio Coelho-Filho; Ciaran J McMullan; Bobak Heydari; Gregory F Michaud; Roy M John; Rob van der Geest; Michael L Steigner; Ron Blankstein; Michael Jerosch-Herold; Raymond Y Kwong Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2013-08-28 Impact factor: 24.094
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
Authors: A J van Ballegooijen; M Visser; M F Cotch; A E Arai; M Garcia; T B Harris; L J Launer; G Eiríksdóttir; V Gudnason; I A Brouwer Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2013-04-12 Impact factor: 5.958