Jonathan W Weinsaft1, Jiwon Kim2, Chaitanya B Medicherla3, Claudia L Ma3, Noel C F Codella4, Nina Kukar5, Subhi Alaref3, Raymond J Kim6, Richard B Devereux3. 1. Greenberg Cardiology Division, Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York; Department of Radiology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York. Electronic address: jww2001@med.cornell.edu. 2. Greenberg Cardiology Division, Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York; Department of Radiology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York. 3. Greenberg Cardiology Division, Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York. 4. IBM T.J. Watson Research Center, Yorktown Heights, New York. 5. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York. 6. Duke Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Center, Durham, North Carolina.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study was to determine the prevalence of post-myocardial infarction (MI) left ventricular (LV) thrombus in the current era and to develop an effective algorithm (predicated on echocardiography [echo]) to discern patients warranting further testing for thrombus via delayed enhancement (DE) cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR). BACKGROUND: LV thrombus affects post-MI management. DE-CMR provides thrombus tissue characterization and is a well-validated but an impractical screening modality for all patients after an MI. METHODS: A same-day echo and CMR were performed according to a tailored protocol, which entailed uniform echo contrast (irrespective of image quality) and dedicated DE-CMR for thrombus tissue characterization. RESULTS: A total of 201 patients were studied; 8% had thrombus according to DE-CMR. All thrombi were apically located; 94% of thrombi occurred in the context of a left anterior descending (LAD) infarct-related artery. Although patients with thrombus had more prolonged chest pain and larger MI (p ≤ 0.01), only 18% had aneurysm on echo (cine-CMR 24%). Noncontrast (35%) and contrast (64%) echo yielded limited sensitivity for thrombus on DE-CMR. Thrombus was associated with stepwise increments in basal → apical contractile dysfunction on echo and quantitative cine-CMR; the echo-measured apical wall motion score was higher among patients with thrombus (p < 0.001) and paralleled cine-CMR decrements in apical ejection fraction and peak ejection rates (both p < 0.005). Thrombus-associated decrements in apical contractile dysfunction were significant even among patients with LAD infarction (p < 0.05). The echo-based apical wall motion score improved overall performance (area under the curve 0.89 ± 0.44) for thrombus compared with ejection fraction (area under the curve 0.80 ± 0.61; p = 0.01). Apical wall motion partitions would have enabled all patients with LV thrombus to be appropriately referred for DE-CMR testing (100% sensitivity and negative predictive value), while avoiding further testing in more than one-half (56% to 63%) of patients. CONCLUSIONS: LV thrombus remains common, especially after LAD MI, and can occur even in the absence of aneurysm. Although DE-CMR yielded improved overall thrombus detection, apical wall motion on a noncontrast echocardiogram can be an effective stratification tool to identify patients in whom DE-CMR thrombus assessment is most warranted. (Diagnostic Utility of Contrast Echocardiography for Detection of LV Thrombi Post ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction; NCT00539045).
OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study was to determine the prevalence of post-myocardial infarction (MI) left ventricular (LV) thrombus in the current era and to develop an effective algorithm (predicated on echocardiography [echo]) to discern patients warranting further testing for thrombus via delayed enhancement (DE) cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR). BACKGROUND:LV thrombus affects post-MI management. DE-CMR provides thrombus tissue characterization and is a well-validated but an impractical screening modality for all patients after an MI. METHODS: A same-day echo and CMR were performed according to a tailored protocol, which entailed uniform echo contrast (irrespective of image quality) and dedicated DE-CMR for thrombus tissue characterization. RESULTS: A total of 201 patients were studied; 8% had thrombus according to DE-CMR. All thrombi were apically located; 94% of thrombi occurred in the context of a left anterior descending (LAD) infarct-related artery. Although patients with thrombus had more prolonged chest pain and larger MI (p ≤ 0.01), only 18% had aneurysm on echo (cine-CMR 24%). Noncontrast (35%) and contrast (64%) echo yielded limited sensitivity for thrombus on DE-CMR. Thrombus was associated with stepwise increments in basal → apical contractile dysfunction on echo and quantitative cine-CMR; the echo-measured apical wall motion score was higher among patients with thrombus (p < 0.001) and paralleled cine-CMR decrements in apical ejection fraction and peak ejection rates (both p < 0.005). Thrombus-associated decrements in apical contractile dysfunction were significant even among patients with LAD infarction (p < 0.05). The echo-based apical wall motion score improved overall performance (area under the curve 0.89 ± 0.44) for thrombus compared with ejection fraction (area under the curve 0.80 ± 0.61; p = 0.01). Apical wall motion partitions would have enabled all patients with LV thrombus to be appropriately referred for DE-CMR testing (100% sensitivity and negative predictive value), while avoiding further testing in more than one-half (56% to 63%) of patients. CONCLUSIONS:LV thrombus remains common, especially after LAD MI, and can occur even in the absence of aneurysm. Although DE-CMR yielded improved overall thrombus detection, apical wall motion on a noncontrast echocardiogram can be an effective stratification tool to identify patients in whom DE-CMR thrombus assessment is most warranted. (Diagnostic Utility of Contrast Echocardiography for Detection of LV Thrombi Post ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction; NCT00539045).
Authors: Roberto M Lang; Michelle Bierig; Richard B Devereux; Frank A Flachskampf; Elyse Foster; Patricia A Pellikka; Michael H Picard; Mary J Roman; James Seward; Jack S Shanewise; Scott D Solomon; Kirk T Spencer; Martin St John Sutton; William J Stewart Journal: J Am Soc Echocardiogr Date: 2005-12 Impact factor: 5.251
Authors: Burkhard Sievers; Michael D Elliott; Lynne M Hurwitz; Timothy S E Albert; Igor Klem; Wolfgang G Rehwald; Michele A Parker; Robert M Judd; Raymond J Kim Journal: Circulation Date: 2007-01-02 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Jonathan W Weinsaft; Han W Kim; Anna Lisa Crowley; Igor Klem; Chetan Shenoy; Lowie Van Assche; Rhoda Brosnan; Dipan J Shah; Eric J Velazquez; Michele Parker; Robert M Judd; Raymond J Kim Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2011-07
Authors: Monvadi B Srichai; Chelif Junor; L Leonardo Rodriguez; Arthur E Stillman; Richard A Grimm; Michael L Lieber; Joan A Weaver; Nicholas G Smedira; Richard D White Journal: Am Heart J Date: 2006-07 Impact factor: 4.749
Authors: Noel C F Codella; Matthew D Cham; Richard Wong; Christopher Chu; James K Min; Martin R Prince; Yi Wang; Jonathan W Weinsaft Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2010-04 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Jonathan W Weinsaft; Han W Kim; Dipan J Shah; Igor Klem; Anna Lisa Crowley; Rhoda Brosnan; Olga G James; Manesh R Patel; John Heitner; Michele Parker; Eric J Velazquez; Charles Steenbergen; Robert M Judd; Raymond J Kim Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2008-07-08 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Jonathan W Weinsaft; Raymond J Kim; Michael Ross; Daniel Krauser; Shant Manoushagian; Troy M LaBounty; Matthew D Cham; James K Min; Kirsten Healy; Yi Wang; Michele Parker; Mary J Roman; Richard B Devereux Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2009-08
Authors: Pratik S Velangi; Christopher Choo; Ko-Hsuan A Chen; Felipe Kazmirczak; Prabhjot S Nijjar; Afshin Farzaneh-Far; Osama Okasha; Mehmet Akçakaya; Jonathan W Weinsaft; Chetan Shenoy Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2019-11-11 Impact factor: 7.792
Authors: Jiwon Kim; Brian Yum; Maria C Palumbo; Razia Sultana; Nathaniel Wright; Mukund Das; Cindy You; Chaya S Moskowitz; Robert A Levine; Richard B Devereux; Jonathan W Weinsaft Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2020-08-19
Authors: Jiwon Kim; Javid Alakbarli; Brian Yum; Nathan H Tehrani; Meridith P Pollie; Christiane Abouzeid; Antonino Di Franco; Mark B Ratcliffe; Athena Poppas; Robert A Levine; Richard B Devereux; Jonathan W Weinsaft Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2018-11-20 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Jiwon Kim; Sara Rodriguez-Diego; Aparna Srinivasan; Rachel-Maria Brown; Meridith P Pollie; Antonino Di Franco; Samantha R Goldburg; Jonathan Y Siden; Mark B Ratcliffe; Robert A Levine; Richard B Devereux; Jonathan W Weinsaft Journal: Echocardiography Date: 2017-08-22 Impact factor: 1.724
Authors: Aiham Albaeni; Khaled Chatila; Hind A Beydoun; May A Beydoun; Mohammad Morsy; Wissam I Khalife Journal: Int J Cardiol Date: 2019-07-23 Impact factor: 4.164
Authors: Gianluca Pontone; Patrizia Carità; Mark G Rabbat; Marco Guglielmo; Andrea Baggiano; Giuseppe Muscogiuri; Andrea I Guaricci Journal: Curr Cardiol Rep Date: 2017-08-31 Impact factor: 2.931