| Literature DB >> 27741939 |
Idan Roifman1, Nilesh R Ghugre2,3,4, Tasnim Vira2, Mohammad I Zia2, Anna Zavodni2,5, Mihaela Pop2,3,4, Kim A Connelly6, Graham A Wright2,3,4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Infarct heterogeneity, as assessed by determination of the peri-infarct zone (PIZ) by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging, has been shown to be an independent predictor for the development of cardiac arrhythmias and mortality post myocardial infarction (MI). The temporal evolution of the PIZ post MI is currently unknown. Thus, the main objective of our study was to describe the temporal evolution of the PIZ over a 6 month time period in contemporarily managed ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients. Further, given the poor prognosis associated with microvascular obstruction (MVO) post STEMI, we sought to compare the temporal evolution of the PIZ in patients with and without MVO. We hypothesized that patients with MVO would show a relative persistence of PIZ over time when compared to those without MVO.Entities:
Keywords: Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging; Gray zone/Peri-infarct zone; Infarct heterogeneity; ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI)
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27741939 PMCID: PMC5064965 DOI: 10.1186/s12872-016-0373-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Cardiovasc Disord ISSN: 1471-2261 Impact factor: 2.298
Characteristics of the patient population
| Total ( | |
|---|---|
| Age (years) | 57 ± 10 |
| Male (%) | 19 (90) |
| Culprit vessel | |
| Left anterior descending | 8 (38) |
| Circumflex | 5 (24) |
| Right coronary artery | 8 (38) |
| Multi-vessel coronary artery disease (%) | 12 (57) |
| DM | 8 (38) |
| Hypertension | 10 (48) |
| Smoking | 8 (38) |
| Dyslipidemia | 4 (19) |
| Peak CK (AU) | 2160 ± 1797 |
| Door to Balloon time (mins) | 73 ± 25 |
| LVEF | 46 ± 7 |
| LVEDVi | 66 ± 13 |
| LVESVi | 36 ± 9 |
| RVEF | 55 ± 12 |
Abbreviations used in the table
DM diabetes mellitus, LVEF left ventricular ejection fraction, LVEDVi (indexed left ventricular end diastolic volume), LVESVi (indexed left ventricular end systolic volume), RVEF right ventricular ejection fraction
Fig. 1Evolution of core infarct size and peri-infarct zone (gray zone) in the entire patient population. Note, there is no difference between the 48 h and 3 week time point, whilst both reduce significantly by 6 months
Characteristics of patients with and without microvascular obstruction (MVO)
| MVO | No MVO |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 56 ± 11 | 59 ± 10 | 0.66 |
| Male (%) | 6 (85) | 11 (92) | 0.83 |
| Culprit vessel | |||
| Left anterior descending | 4 (44) | 4 (33) | 0.6 |
| Circumflex | 3 (33) | 2 (17) | 0.37 |
| Right coronary artery | 2 (22) | 6 (50) | 0.19 |
| Multi-vessel coronary artery disease (%) | 5 (56) | 7 (58) | 0.90 |
| DM | 3 (33) | 5 (17) | 0.7 |
| Hypertension | 4 (44) | 6 (50) | 0.8 |
| Smoking | 4 (44) | 4 (33) | 0.6 |
| Dyslipidemia | 1 (11) | 3 (8) | 0.42 |
| Peak CK (AU) | 3209 ± 2123 | 1264 ± 906 | 0.03 |
| Door to Balloon time (mins) | 78 ± 33 | 67 ± 20 | 0.5 |
| LVEF | 41 ± 3 | 49 ± 6 | 0.04 |
| LVEDVi | 67 ± 14 | 69 ± 10 | 0.7 |
| LVESVi | 39 ± 8 | 35 ± 8 | 0.55 |
| RVEF | 53 ± 7 | 55 ± 10 | 0.76 |
Abbreviations used in the table
DM diabetes mellitus, LVEF left ventricular ejection fraction, LVEDVi (indexed left ventricular end diastolic volume), LVESVi (indexed left ventricular end systolic volume), RVEF right ventricular ejection fraction
Fig. 2Evolution of core infarct size in patients with and without MVO. Panel (a) represents means and standard deviations of core infarct size, expressed as a percentage of LV mass, for all patients with MVO across the three time frames. Panel (b) represents the T1 weighted IR-GRE Late gadolinium enhancement images in a patient with MVO. Panel (c) represents means and standard deviations of core infarct size, expressed as a percentage of LV mass, for all patients without MVO across the three time frames. Panel (d) represents the T1 weighted IR-GRE Late gadolinium enhancement images in a patient without MVO
Fig. 3Evolution of the peri-infarct zone in patients with and without MVO. Panel (a) represents means and standard deviations of peri-infarct zone size, expressed as a percentage of LV mass, for all patients with MVO across the three time frames. Panel (b) represents T1 weighted IR-GRE Late gadolinium enhancement images in a patient with MVO with infarct core superimposed in green and PIZ superimposed in yellow. The red represents area of no reflow or MVO. Directly underneath, a panel displaying T2 maps at the three different time frames for the same patient is displayed. The yellow arrow indicates the T2 value in the PIZ and the white arrow indicates the T2 value in the remote myocardium. Panel (c) represents means and standard deviations of peri-infarct zone size, expressed as a percentage of LV mass, for all patients without MVO across the three time frames. Panel (d) represents the T1 weighted IR-GRE Late gadolinium enhancement images in a patient without MVO with infarct core superimposed in green and PIZ superimposed in yellow. Directly underneath, a panel displaying T2 maps at the three different time frames for the same patient is displayed. The yellow arrow indicates the T2 value in the PIZ and the white arrow indicates the T2 value in the remote myocardium. Of note, the patient with MVO has higher T2 values in the PIZ when compared to the patient without MVO at 48 h and 3 weeks but not at 6 months. Further, in both patients, T2 values in the PIZ are elevated at the first two time-frames when compared to the remote myocardium. At 6 months, T2 values are similar in the PIZ and the remote myocardium in both patients. A yellow patch is noted in the septal region in the patient without MVO at 6 months that is due to artifact from patient motion
Fig. 4Inter-observer agreement in the assessment of peri-infarct zone. a Pearson correlation comparing observer 1 to observer 2. b Bland-Altman Plot assessing peri-infarct zone. Dashed lines represent the 95 % limits of agreement