Anthony A Holmes1,2, Jorge Romero1, Jeffrey M Levsky1,3, Linda B Haramati1,3, Newton Phuong1, Leila Rezai-Gharai3,4, Stuart Cohen3,5, Lina Restrepo1, Luis Ruiz-Guerrero6, John D Fisher1, Cynthia C Taub1, Luigi Di Biase1, Mario J Garcia7,8. 1. Division of Cardiology, Montefiore Medical Center, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, 111 East 210th Street, Bronx, NY, 10467, USA. 2. Leon H. Charney Division of Cardiology, NYU Langone Medical Center, NYU School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA. 3. Department of Radiology, Montefiore Medical Center, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, USA. 4. Department of Radiology, VCU Medical Center, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA. 5. Department of Radiology, North Shore Long Island Jewish Medical Center, New Hyde Park, NY, USA. 6. Division of Cardiology, Hospital Universitario Marques de Valdecilla, Santander, Spain. 7. Division of Cardiology, Montefiore Medical Center, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, 111 East 210th Street, Bronx, NY, 10467, USA. mariogar@montefiore.org. 8. Department of Radiology, Montefiore Medical Center, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, USA. mariogar@montefiore.org.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Late adverse myocardial remodeling after acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is strongly associated with sudden cardiac death (SCD). Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) performed early after AMI can predict late remodeling and SCD risk with moderate accuracy. This study assessed the ability of CMR-measured circumferential strain (CS) to add incremental predictive information to late gadolinium enhancement (LGE). METHODS: Patients with an AMI and LVEF < 50% were screened for inclusion. A total of 27 patients, totaling 432 myocardial segments, prospectively underwent CMR 7 ± 5 days after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). LGE, microvascular obstruction (MVO), and myocardial CS were measured for each segment. The primary endpoint was late segmental adverse remodeling defined as segmental wall motion score (WMS) > 1 measured by echocardiography 3 months after PCI. RESULTS: A total of 141 segments experienced the primary endpoint at 3 months. The mean LGE volume was higher in these segments, but LGE was also present in many segments with normal WMS (40 ± 28 versus 20 ± 26%, p < 0.01). Segments that met the primary endpoint also showed greater impairment of CS. Segments with both LGE > 17% and impaired CS >- 7.2% on CMR were more likely to experience late adverse remodeling (73%) as compared to segments with neither (9%, p < 0.001) or one abnormal parameter (36%, p < 0.001). CS >- 7.2% also added incremental accuracy to LGE > 17% for predicting late adverse remodeling (AUC 0.81 from 0.70, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: When performed early after AMI, LGE is a moderate predictor of late remodeling and CS is a powerful predictor of late myocardial remodeling. When combined, they can predict late remodeling, a surrogate of SCD, with high accuracy.
PURPOSE: Late adverse myocardial remodeling after acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is strongly associated with sudden cardiac death (SCD). Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) performed early after AMI can predict late remodeling and SCD risk with moderate accuracy. This study assessed the ability of CMR-measured circumferential strain (CS) to add incremental predictive information to late gadolinium enhancement (LGE). METHODS:Patients with an AMI and LVEF < 50% were screened for inclusion. A total of 27 patients, totaling 432 myocardial segments, prospectively underwent CMR 7 ± 5 days after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). LGE, microvascular obstruction (MVO), and myocardial CS were measured for each segment. The primary endpoint was late segmental adverse remodeling defined as segmental wall motion score (WMS) > 1 measured by echocardiography 3 months after PCI. RESULTS: A total of 141 segments experienced the primary endpoint at 3 months. The mean LGE volume was higher in these segments, but LGE was also present in many segments with normal WMS (40 ± 28 versus 20 ± 26%, p < 0.01). Segments that met the primary endpoint also showed greater impairment of CS. Segments with both LGE > 17% and impaired CS >- 7.2% on CMR were more likely to experience late adverse remodeling (73%) as compared to segments with neither (9%, p < 0.001) or one abnormal parameter (36%, p < 0.001). CS >- 7.2% also added incremental accuracy to LGE > 17% for predicting late adverse remodeling (AUC 0.81 from 0.70, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: When performed early after AMI, LGE is a moderate predictor of late remodeling and CS is a powerful predictor of late myocardial remodeling. When combined, they can predict late remodeling, a surrogate of SCD, with high accuracy.
Entities:
Keywords:
Late gadolinium enhancement; Myocardial infarction; Remodeling; Strain
Authors: Michael H Picard; David Adams; S Michelle Bierig; John M Dent; Pamela S Douglas; Linda D Gillam; Andrew M Keller; David J Malenka; Frederick A Masoudi; Marti McCulloch; Patricia A Pellikka; Priscilla J Peters; Raymond F Stainback; G Monet Strachan; William A Zoghbi Journal: J Am Soc Echocardiogr Date: 2011-01 Impact factor: 5.251
Authors: Arthur J Moss; Wojciech Zareba; W Jackson Hall; Helmut Klein; David J Wilber; David S Cannom; James P Daubert; Steven L Higgins; Mary W Brown; Mark L Andrews Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2002-03-19 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Igor Klem; Dipan J Shah; Richard D White; Dudley J Pennell; Albert C van Rossum; Matthias Regenfus; Udo Sechtem; Paulo R Schvartzman; Peter Hunold; Pierre Croisille; Michele Parker; Robert M Judd; Raymond J Kim Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2011-09-12 Impact factor: 7.792
Authors: W J Rogers; C M Kramer; G Geskin; Y L Hu; T M Theobald; D A Vido; S Petruolo; N Reichek Journal: Circulation Date: 1999-02-16 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Sjoerd A Mollema; Victoria Delgado; Matteo Bertini; M Louisa Antoni; Eric Boersma; Eduard R Holman; Marcel P M Stokkel; Ernst E van der Wall; Martin J Schalij; Jeroen J Bax Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2009-10-09 Impact factor: 7.792
Authors: Martin Reindl; Christina Tiller; Magdalena Holzknecht; Ivan Lechner; Dorothea Eisner; Laura Riepl; Mathias Pamminger; Benjamin Henninger; Agnes Mayr; Johannes P Schwaiger; Gert Klug; Axel Bauer; Bernhard Metzler; Sebastian J Reinstadler Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2020-04-15 Impact factor: 5.460
Authors: Pierpaolo Palumbo; Francesco Masedu; Camilla De Cataldo; Ester Cannizzaro; Federico Bruno; Silvia Pradella; Francesco Arrigoni; Marco Valenti; Alessandra Splendiani; Antonio Barile; Andrea Giovagnoni; Carlo Masciocchi; Ernesto Di Cesare Journal: Radiol Med Date: 2021-12-11 Impact factor: 3.469
Authors: Han Wu; Ran Li; Kun Wang; Dan Mu; Jian-Zhou Chen; Xuan Wei; Xue Bao; Zhong-Hai Wei; Jun Xie; Biao Xu Journal: Cardiol Res Pract Date: 2020-09-26 Impact factor: 1.866
Authors: Steve W Leung; Richard J Charnigo; Theresa Ratajczak; Mohamed Abo-Aly; Elica Shokri; Ahmed Abdel-Latif; Jonathan F Wenk Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2021-06-10 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Camilla Calvieri; Nicola Galea; Francesco Cilia; Giacomo Pambianchi; Giuseppe Mancuso; Domenico Filomena; Sara Cimino; Iacopo Carbone; Marco Francone; Luciano Agati; Carlo Catalano Journal: Front Cardiovasc Med Date: 2022-03-16