Sonia Gómez-Revelles1,2,3, Xavier Rossello4, José Díaz-Villanueva5, Ignacio López-Lima5, Esteban Sciarresi5, Mariano Estofán5, Francesc Carreras4,6,5, Sandra Pujadas4,6, Guillem Pons-Lladó4,6,5. 1. Cardiac Imaging Unit, Cardiology Department, Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, C/ Mas Casanovas 90, 08041, Barcelona, Spain. sgomezrevelles@gmail.com. 2. Clínica Creu Blanca, Barcelona, Spain. sgomezrevelles@gmail.com. 3. Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain. sgomezrevelles@gmail.com. 4. Cardiac Imaging Unit, Cardiology Department, Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, C/ Mas Casanovas 90, 08041, Barcelona, Spain. 5. Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain. 6. Clínica Creu Blanca, Barcelona, Spain.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) provides information on myocardial ischemia through stress perfusion studies. In clinical practice, the grading of induced perfusion defects is performed by visual estimation of their extension. The aim of our study is to devise a score of the degree of ischemia and to test its prognostic value. METHODS: Between 2009 and 2011, patients with diagnosed or suspected coronary artery disease underwent stress perfusion CMR. A score of ischemic burden was calculated on the basis of (1) stress-induced perfusion defect, (2) persistence, (3) transmurality, and (4) stress-induced contractile defect. Follow-up was censored after 4 years and primary end-point was defined by a composite of death, heart failure episode, acute coronary syndrome, and ventricular arrhythmias. Univariate and multivariate logistic regressions were used to assess the strength of the association between the CMR ischemic variables, and the composite outcome. RESULTS: Forty-four of the 128 patients (34%) presented with adverse events, while 84 (66%) did not. Sixty-one patients (48%) had negative perfusion studies while 67 (52%) showed perfusion defect. Patients with positive perfusion studies and adverse events (n = 39) had higher number of segments with persistent defect (3.3 vs 1.3, p = 0.001) and highest score (19.6 vs 13.3 p = 0.012) than patients with positive perfusion studies and absence of events (n = 28). The number of segments with persistent defect showed the strongest predictive value of adverse events (OR 1.54; CI 1.19-2.00; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The score of ischemic burden proposed herein has prognostic value. Persistence of a perfusion defect has the strongest impact on prognosis. KEY POINTS: • Cardiovascular magnetic resonance provides information on myocardial ischemia by visual estimation of the presence of perfusion defects induced by stress. • There is not a standardized method for grading perfusion defects which, in practice, is performed by visual estimation of their extension. • As proven in this study, the integration of several parameters of perfusion defects (in addition to extension) into a semiquantitative score has prognostic value.
OBJECTIVES: Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) provides information on myocardial ischemia through stress perfusion studies. In clinical practice, the grading of induced perfusion defects is performed by visual estimation of their extension. The aim of our study is to devise a score of the degree of ischemia and to test its prognostic value. METHODS: Between 2009 and 2011, patients with diagnosed or suspected coronary artery disease underwent stress perfusion CMR. A score of ischemic burden was calculated on the basis of (1) stress-induced perfusion defect, (2) persistence, (3) transmurality, and (4) stress-induced contractile defect. Follow-up was censored after 4 years and primary end-point was defined by a composite of death, heart failure episode, acute coronary syndrome, and ventricular arrhythmias. Univariate and multivariate logistic regressions were used to assess the strength of the association between the CMR ischemic variables, and the composite outcome. RESULTS: Forty-four of the 128 patients (34%) presented with adverse events, while 84 (66%) did not. Sixty-one patients (48%) had negative perfusion studies while 67 (52%) showed perfusion defect. Patients with positive perfusion studies and adverse events (n = 39) had higher number of segments with persistent defect (3.3 vs 1.3, p = 0.001) and highest score (19.6 vs 13.3 p = 0.012) than patients with positive perfusion studies and absence of events (n = 28). The number of segments with persistent defect showed the strongest predictive value of adverse events (OR 1.54; CI 1.19-2.00; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The score of ischemic burden proposed herein has prognostic value. Persistence of a perfusion defect has the strongest impact on prognosis. KEY POINTS: • Cardiovascular magnetic resonance provides information on myocardial ischemia by visual estimation of the presence of perfusion defects induced by stress. • There is not a standardized method for grading perfusion defects which, in practice, is performed by visual estimation of their extension. • As proven in this study, the integration of several parameters of perfusion defects (in addition to extension) into a semiquantitative score has prognostic value.
Authors: Ravi Shah; Bobak Heydari; Otavio Coelho-Filho; Venkatesh L Murthy; Siddique Abbasi; Jiazhuo H Feng; Michael Pencina; Tomas G Neilan; Judith L Meadows; Sanjeev Francis; Ron Blankstein; Michael Steigner; Marcelo di Carli; Michael Jerosch-Herold; Raymond Y Kwong Journal: Circulation Date: 2013-06-26 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Manesh R Patel; Gregory J Dehmer; John W Hirshfeld; Peter K Smith; John A Spertus Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2012-01-30 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Federico E Mordini; Tariq Haddad; Li-Yueh Hsu; Peter Kellman; Tracy B Lowrey; Anthony H Aletras; W Patricia Bandettini; Andrew E Arai Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2014-01
Authors: Stuart Watkins; Ross McGeoch; Jonathan Lyne; Tracey Steedman; Richard Good; Mairi-Jean McLaughlin; Tony Cunningham; Vladimir Bezlyak; Ian Ford; Henry J Dargie; Keith G Oldroyd Journal: Circulation Date: 2009-11-16 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Roy Jogiya; Sebastian Kozerke; Geraint Morton; Kalpa De Silva; Simon Redwood; Divaka Perera; Eike Nagel; Sven Plein Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2012-07-18 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Shazia T Hussain; Matthias Paul; Sven Plein; Gerry P McCann; Ajay M Shah; Michael S Marber; Amedeo Chiribiri; Geraint Morton; Simon Redwood; Philip MacCarthy; Andreas Schuster; Masaki Ishida; Mark A Westwood; Divaka Perera; Eike Nagel Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Date: 2012-09-19 Impact factor: 5.364
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