Giovanni Luigi De Maria1, Mohammad Alkhalil2, Mathias Wolfrum2, Gregor Fahrni2, Alessandra Borlotti3, Lisa Gaughran2, Sam Dawkins2, Jeremy P Langrish2, Andrew J Lucking2, Robin P Choudhury4, Italo Porto5, Filippo Crea5, Erica Dall'Armellina1, Keith M Channon2, Rajesh K Kharbanda2, Adrian P Banning6. 1. Oxford Heart Centre, National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centre, Oxford University Hospitals, Oxford, United Kingdom; Acute Vascular Imaging Centre, Radcliffe Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom. 2. Oxford Heart Centre, National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centre, Oxford University Hospitals, Oxford, United Kingdom. 3. Oxford Heart Centre, National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centre, Oxford University Hospitals, Oxford, United Kingdom; Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, British Heart Foundation Centre of Research Excellence, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom. 4. Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, British Heart Foundation Centre of Research Excellence, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom; Department of Cardiology, Policlinico A. Gemelli, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy. 5. Acute Vascular Imaging Centre, Radcliffe Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom. 6. Oxford Heart Centre, National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centre, Oxford University Hospitals, Oxford, United Kingdom. Electronic address: adrian.banning@ouh.nhs.uk.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to compare the value of the index of microcirculatory resistance (IMR) and microvascular obstruction (MVO) measured by cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) in patients treated for and recovering from ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. BACKGROUND: IMR can identify patients with microvascular dysfunction acutely after primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI), and a threshold of >40 has been shown to be associated with an adverse clinical outcome. Similarly, MVO is recognized as an adverse feature in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Even though both IMR and MVO reflect coronary microvascular status, the interaction between these 2 parameters is uncertain. METHODS: A total of 110 patients treated with pPCI were included, and IMR was measured immediately at completion of pPCI. Infarct size (IS) as a percentage of left ventricular mass was quantified at 48 h (38.4 ± 12.0 h) and 6 months (194.0 ± 20.0 days) using CMR. MVO was identified and quantified at 48 h by CMR. RESULTS: Overall, a discordance between IMR and MVO was observed in 36.7% of cases, with 31 patients having MVO and IMR ≤40. Compared with patients with MVO and IMR ≤40, patients with both MVO and IMR >40 had an 11.9-fold increased risk of final IS >25% at 6 months (p = 0.001). Patients with MVO and IMR ≤40 had a significantly smaller IS at 6 months (p = 0.001), with significant regression in IS over time (34.4% [interquartile range (IQR): 27.3% to 41.0%] vs. 22.3% [IQR: 16.0% to 30.0%]; p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Discordant prognostic information was obtained from IMR and MVO in nearly one-third of cases; however, IMR can be helpful in grading the degree and severity of MVO.
OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to compare the value of the index of microcirculatory resistance (IMR) and microvascular obstruction (MVO) measured by cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) in patients treated for and recovering from ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. BACKGROUND: IMR can identify patients with microvascular dysfunction acutely after primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI), and a threshold of >40 has been shown to be associated with an adverse clinical outcome. Similarly, MVO is recognized as an adverse feature in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Even though both IMR and MVO reflect coronary microvascular status, the interaction between these 2 parameters is uncertain. METHODS: A total of 110 patients treated with pPCI were included, and IMR was measured immediately at completion of pPCI. Infarct size (IS) as a percentage of left ventricular mass was quantified at 48 h (38.4 ± 12.0 h) and 6 months (194.0 ± 20.0 days) using CMR. MVO was identified and quantified at 48 h by CMR. RESULTS: Overall, a discordance between IMR and MVO was observed in 36.7% of cases, with 31 patients having MVO and IMR ≤40. Compared with patients with MVO and IMR ≤40, patients with both MVO and IMR >40 had an 11.9-fold increased risk of final IS >25% at 6 months (p = 0.001). Patients with MVO and IMR ≤40 had a significantly smaller IS at 6 months (p = 0.001), with significant regression in IS over time (34.4% [interquartile range (IQR): 27.3% to 41.0%] vs. 22.3% [IQR: 16.0% to 30.0%]; p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Discordant prognostic information was obtained from IMR and MVO in nearly one-third of cases; however, IMR can be helpful in grading the degree and severity of MVO.
Authors: Nidaa Mikail; Alexia Rossi; Susan Bengs; Ahmed Haider; Barbara E Stähli; Angela Portmann; Alessio Imperiale; Valerie Treyer; Alexander Meisel; Aju P Pazhenkottil; Michael Messerli; Vera Regitz-Zagrosek; Philipp A Kaufmann; Ronny R Buechel; Cathérine Gebhard Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2022-08-17 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Federico Marin; Roberto Scarsini; Dimitrios Terentes-Printzios; Rafail A Kotronias; Flavio Ribichini; Adrian P Banning; Giovanni Luigi De Maria Journal: Curr Cardiol Rev Date: 2022
Authors: Roberto Scarsini; Dimitrios Terentes-Printzios; Giovanni Luigi De Maria; Flavio Ribichini; Adrian Banning Journal: Interv Cardiol Date: 2020-06-04
Authors: Annette M Maznyczka; Keith G Oldroyd; John P Greenwood; Peter J McCartney; James Cotton; Mitchell Lindsay; Margaret McEntegart; J Paul Rocchiccioli; Richard Good; Keith Robertson; Hany Eteiba; Stuart Watkins; Aadil Shaukat; Colin J Petrie; Aengus Murphy; Mark C Petrie; Colin Berry Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Interv Date: 2020-05-15 Impact factor: 6.546
Authors: Annette M Maznyczka; Peter J McCartney; Keith G Oldroyd; Mitchell Lindsay; Margaret McEntegart; Hany Eteiba; Paul Rocchiccioli; Richard Good; Aadil Shaukat; Keith Robertson; Vivek Kodoth; John P Greenwood; James M Cotton; Stuart Hood; Stuart Watkins; Peter W Macfarlane; Julie Kennedy; R Campbell Tait; Paul Welsh; Naveed Sattar; Damien Collison; Lynsey Gillespie; Alex McConnachie; Colin Berry Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2020-01-28 Impact factor: 5.501
Authors: Matteo Tebaldi; Simone Biscaglia; Domenico Di Girolamo; Andrea Erriquez; Carlo Penzo; Carlo Tumscitz; Gianluca Campo Journal: J Interv Cardiol Date: 2020-10-25 Impact factor: 2.279