Literature DB >> 26293358

Prognostic value of heart rate response during regadenoson stress myocardial perfusion imaging in patients with end stage renal disease.

Wael AlJaroudi1, Tania Campagnoli2, Ibtihaj Fughhi2, Marwan Wassouf2, Amjad Ali3, Rami Doukky4,5.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Blunted heart rate response (HRR) to vasodilator stress agents is associated with worse outcomes. There are limited data assessing the effect of impaired HRR to regadenoson among patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) undergoing stress myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI).
METHODS: We prospectively followed patients with ESRD enrolled in the ASSUAGE and ASSUAGE-CKD trials. HRR was defined as 100*(peak stress heart rate-resting heart rate)/resting heart rate. Study cohort was dichotomized to blunted and normal HRR groups according to an established median HRR value <28% or ≥28%, which were propensity-score matched based on 22 clinical and imaging covariates. The Primary endpoint was all-cause death. The secondary cardiac-specific endpoints included: (1) the composite endpoint of cardiac death or myocardial infarction; (2) the composite endpoint of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or late (>90 days) coronary revascularization.
RESULTS: There were 303 patients followed for 35 ± 10 months. In the entire cohort, there was a stepwise increase in the rates of death and all secondary endpoints with worsening HRR (P values ≤.001). Blunted HRR (<28%) was associated with increased risk of death (unadjusted hazard ratio 4.10 [1.98-8.46], P < .001) and all secondary endpoints (P ≤ .001). After multivariate adjustment, HRR remained an independent predictor of mortality and secondary endpoints whether used as continuous or dichotomous variable, and added incremental prognostic value for all-cause death (P = .046). Blunted HRR was associated with increased event rate among patients with normal myocardial perfusion (P = .001) and abnormal perfusion (P = .053). In the propensity-matched cohort of 132 patients (66 in each group), blunted HRR was associated with significant increase in all-cause death (21% vs. 5%, HR 5.09 [1.46-17.7], P=.011), and similarly for the secondary endpoints.
CONCLUSION: Blunted HRR (<28%) to regadenoson is a strong and independent predictor of death and cardiovascular events in patients with ESRD and adds incremental prognostic value.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Heart rate response; end-stage renal disease; myocardial perfusion imaging; outcome; prognosis; regadenoson

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26293358     DOI: 10.1007/s12350-015-0234-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol        ISSN: 1071-3581            Impact factor:   5.952


  28 in total

1.  Heart rate response during dipyridamole stress as a predictor of mortality in patients with normal myocardial perfusion and normal electrocardiograms.

Authors:  Rohit Bhatheja; Gary S Francis; Claire E Pothier; Michael S Lauer
Journal:  Am J Cardiol       Date:  2005-05-15       Impact factor: 2.778

2.  The prognostic value of left ventricular mechanical dyssynchrony using gated myocardial perfusion imaging in patients with end-stage renal disease.

Authors:  Himanshu Aggarwal; Wael A AlJaroudi; Shikha Mehta; Roslyn Mannon; Jaekyeong Heo; Ami E Iskandrian; Fadi G Hage
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2014-05-24       Impact factor: 5.952

Review 3.  An overview of the objectives of and the approaches to propensity score analyses.

Authors:  Georg Heinze; Peter Jüni
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2011-02-28       Impact factor: 29.983

4.  Left ventricular mechanical dyssynchrony by phase analysis of gated single photon emission computed tomography in end-stage renal disease.

Authors:  Wael Aljaroudi; Jayanth Koneru; Fahad Iqbal; Himanshu Aggarwal; Jaekyeong Heo; Ami E Iskandrian
Journal:  Am J Cardiol       Date:  2010-10-01       Impact factor: 2.778

5.  Blunted heart rate response as a predictor of cardiac death in patients undergoing vasodilator stress technetium-99m sestamibi gated SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging.

Authors:  Shishir Mathur; Anuj R Shah; Alan W Ahlberg; Deborah M Katten; Gary V Heller
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2010-05-19       Impact factor: 5.952

6.  A blunted heart rate response to regadenoson is an independent prognostic indicator in patients undergoing myocardial perfusion imaging.

Authors:  Fadi G Hage; Phillip Dean; Fahad Iqbal; Jaekyeong Heo; Ami E Iskandrian
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2011-07-22       Impact factor: 5.952

7.  Prognostic impact of hemodynamic response to adenosine in patients older than age 55 years undergoing vasodilator stress myocardial perfusion study.

Authors:  Aiden Abidov; Rory Hachamovitch; Sean W Hayes; Chee Keong Ng; Ishac Cohen; John D Friedman; Guido Germano; Daniel S Berman
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2003-06-09       Impact factor: 29.690

8.  The prognostic value of regadenoson myocardial perfusion imaging.

Authors:  Fadi G Hage; Gopal Ghimire; Davis Lester; Joshua Mckay; Steven Bleich; Stephanie El-Hajj; Ami E Iskandrian
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2015-02-14       Impact factor: 5.952

9.  Reclassification of cardiovascular risk in patients with normal myocardial perfusion imaging using heart rate response to vasodilator stress.

Authors:  Fahad M Iqbal; Wael Al Jaroudi; Kumar Sanam; Aaron Sweeney; Jaekyeong Heo; Ami E Iskandrian; Fadi G Hage
Journal:  Am J Cardiol       Date:  2012-10-27       Impact factor: 2.778

10.  Differences in heart rate response to adenosine and regadenoson in patients with and without diabetes mellitus.

Authors:  Fadi G Hage; Jaekyeong Heo; Billy Franks; Luiz Belardinelli; Brent Blackburn; Whedy Wang; Ami E Iskandrian
Journal:  Am Heart J       Date:  2009-03-06       Impact factor: 4.749

View more
  21 in total

1.  Heart rate response to regadenoson: Making the case for its value in clinical practice.

Authors:  Efstathia Andrikopoulou; Fadi G Hage
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2015-08-27       Impact factor: 5.952

2.  Stress testing in patients with chronic kidney disease: The need for ancillary markers for effective risk stratification and prognosis.

Authors:  Sripal Bangalore
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2015-08-22       Impact factor: 5.952

3.  Prognostic value of myocardial perfusion imaging performed pre-renal transplantation: post-transplantation follow-up and outcomes.

Authors:  Christopher W Ives; Wael A AlJaroudi; Vineeta Kumar; Ayman Farag; Dana V Rizk; Suzanne Oparil; Ami E Iskandrian; Fadi G Hage
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2018-06-07       Impact factor: 9.236

Review 4.  Multi-modality imaging: Bird's eye view from the 2016 American Heart Association Scientific Sessions.

Authors:  Wael A AlJaroudi; Steven G Lloyd; Farooq A Chaudhry; Fadi G Hage
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2017-02-15       Impact factor: 5.952

Review 5.  Review of cardiovascular imaging in the journal of nuclear cardiology in 2016: Part 2 of 2-myocardial perfusion imaging.

Authors:  Fadi G Hage; Wael A AlJaroudi
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2017-04-06       Impact factor: 5.952

6.  Review of Cardiovascular Imaging in the Journal of Nuclear Cardiology in 2015-Part 2 of 2: Myocardial perfusion imaging.

Authors:  Fadi G Hage; Wael A AlJaroudi
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2016-02-18       Impact factor: 5.952

7.  Influence of hemodialysis on regadenoson clearance in an in vitro hemodialysis model.

Authors:  Katherine N Gharibian; Venkatesh L Murthy; Bruce A Mueller
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2016-09-15       Impact factor: 5.952

8.  Risk stratification for renal transplantation: A role for heart rate response?

Authors:  Matthew Topel; Leslee J Shaw; Joe X Xie
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2017-10-30       Impact factor: 5.952

9.  Myocardial stunning by gated SPECT: An old tool reinvented in a stunning turn.

Authors:  Wael A AlJaroudi; Fadi G Hage
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2017-11-14       Impact factor: 5.952

10.  Adverse effects associated with regadenoson myocardial perfusion imaging.

Authors:  Efstathia Andrikopoulou; Fadi G Hage
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2018-02-21       Impact factor: 5.952

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.