BACKGROUND:Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) has become a diagnostic modality that allows for prognostic risk stratification in various cardiac diseases. CMR derived detection of myocardial necrosis by late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) and assessment of left ventricular functional parameters such as left-ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) have been proven to be significantly associated with outcome and prognosis. Our study focusses on the validation of specific thresholds for these parameters in a multi-center daily all-comers cohort of stable coronary artery disease (CAD) patients. METHODS: Multi-center data from tertiary high-volume CMR centers were pooled. Patients referred for viability testing for known or suspected CAD were enrolled. Functional parameters of both ventricles and myocardial necrosis were assessed. The primary endpoint was defined as cardiac death and non-fatal myocardial infarction. A multi-model approach was used for the evaluation of the predictive power of several LVEF thresholds and LGE. RESULTS: The study cohort consisted of 2422 patients. Median age was 66 years; 25.9 % were female. Median follow-up was 2.86 years. During the follow-up period, 187 primary endpoints occurred. On multi-model testing, optimal thresholds for LVEF could be defined at ≤50 and ≤35 %. The addition of LGE as categorical variable further lead to a significant improvement of each risk prediction model, whilst quantification of LGE affection had no additional prognostic impact. CONCLUSION: LVEF thresholds at ≤50 and ≤35 % in combination with the assessment of LGE presence allows for excellent discrimination between low, mid and high prognostic risk in stable CAD.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) has become a diagnostic modality that allows for prognostic risk stratification in various cardiac diseases. CMR derived detection of myocardial necrosis by late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) and assessment of left ventricular functional parameters such as left-ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) have been proven to be significantly associated with outcome and prognosis. Our study focusses on the validation of specific thresholds for these parameters in a multi-center daily all-comers cohort of stable coronary artery disease (CAD) patients. METHODS: Multi-center data from tertiary high-volume CMR centers were pooled. Patients referred for viability testing for known or suspected CAD were enrolled. Functional parameters of both ventricles and myocardial necrosis were assessed. The primary endpoint was defined as cardiac death and non-fatal myocardial infarction. A multi-model approach was used for the evaluation of the predictive power of several LVEF thresholds and LGE. RESULTS: The study cohort consisted of 2422 patients. Median age was 66 years; 25.9 % were female. Median follow-up was 2.86 years. During the follow-up period, 187 primary endpoints occurred. On multi-model testing, optimal thresholds for LVEF could be defined at ≤50 and ≤35 %. The addition of LGE as categorical variable further lead to a significant improvement of each risk prediction model, whilst quantification of LGE affection had no additional prognostic impact. CONCLUSION: LVEF thresholds at ≤50 and ≤35 % in combination with the assessment of LGE presence allows for excellent discrimination between low, mid and high prognostic risk in stable CAD.
Entities:
Keywords:
Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging; Late gadolinium enhancement; Left-ventricular ejection fraction; Prognosis; Risk stratification; Stable coronary artery disease
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: 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: Michael J Lipinski; Courtney M McVey; Jeffrey S Berger; Christopher M Kramer; Michael Salerno Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2013-05-30 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Jeanette Schulz-Menger; David A Bluemke; Jens Bremerich; Scott D Flamm; Mark A Fogel; Matthias G Friedrich; Raymond J Kim; Florian von Knobelsdorff-Brenkenhoff; Christopher M Kramer; Dudley J Pennell; Sven Plein; Eike Nagel Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Date: 2013-05-01 Impact factor: 5.364
Authors: Christopher M Kramer; Jörg Barkhausen; Scott D Flamm; Raymond J Kim; Eike Nagel Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Date: 2013-10-08 Impact factor: 5.364
Authors: João Pedro Ferreira; Kévin Duarte; Gilles Montalescot; Bertram Pitt; Esteban Lopez de Sa; Christian W Hamm; Marcus Flather; Freek Verheugt; Harry Shi; Eva Turgonyi; Miguel Orri; Patrick Rossignol; John Vincent; Faiez Zannad Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2017-08-29 Impact factor: 5.460
Authors: Jack J Miller; Angus Z Lau; Per Mose Nielsen; Giles McMullen-Klein; Andrew J Lewis; Nichlas Riise Jespersen; Vicky Ball; Ferdia A Gallagher; Carolyn A Carr; Christoffer Laustsen; Hans Erik Bøtker; Damian J Tyler; Marie A Schroeder Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2017-12-13