Jose F Rodriguez-Palomares1, Jose Gavara2, Ignacio Ferreira-González3, Filipa Valente1, César Rios2, Julián Rodríguez-García1, Clara Bonanad2, Bruno García Del Blanco1, Gema Miñana2, Maria Mutuberria1, Julio Nuñez2, José Barrabés1, Artur Evangelista1, Vicente Bodí4, David García-Dorado5. 1. Department of Cardiology, Hospital Universitari Vall d'Hebron, Vall d'Hebron Institut de Recerca, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain; Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red-para enfermedades cardiovasculares, CIBERCV, Madrid, Spain. 2. Department of Cardiology, Hospital Clinico Universitario, CIBERCV, INCLIVA, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain. 3. Department of Cardiology, Hospital Universitari Vall d'Hebron, Vall d'Hebron Institut de Recerca, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain; CIBER de Epidemiología y Salud Pública, CIBERESP, Madrid, Spain. 4. Department of Cardiology, Hospital Clinico Universitario, CIBERCV, INCLIVA, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain. Electronic address: vicente.bodi@uv.es. 5. Department of Cardiology, Hospital Universitari Vall d'Hebron, Vall d'Hebron Institut de Recerca, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain; Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red-para enfermedades cardiovasculares, CIBERCV, Madrid, Spain. Electronic address: dgdorado@vhebron.net.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study sought to establish the best definition of left ventricular adverse remodeling (LVAR) to predict outcomes and determine whether its assessment adds prognostic information to that obtained by early cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR). BACKGROUND: LVAR, usually defined as an increase in left ventricular end-diastolic volume (LVEDV) is the main cause of heart failure after an ST-segment elevated myocardial infarction; however, the role of assessment of LVAR in predicting cardiovascular events remains controversial. METHODS: Patients with ST-segment elevated myocardial infarction who received percutaneous coronary intervention within 6 h of symptom onset were included (n = 498). CMR was performed during hospitalization (6.2 ± 2.6 days) and after 6 months (6.1 ± 1.8 months). The optimal threshold values of the LVEDV increase and the LV ejection fraction decrease associated with the primary endpoint were ascertained. Primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular mortality, hospitalization for heart failure, or ventricular arrhythmia. RESULTS: The study was completed by 374 patients. Forty-nine patients presented the primary endpoint during follow-up (72.9 ± 42.8 months). Values that maximized the ability to identify patients with and without outcomes were a relative rise in LVEDV of 15% (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.1; p = 0.007) and a relative fall in LV ejection fraction of 3% (HR: 2.5; p = 0.001). However, the predictive model (using C-statistic analysis) failed to demonstrate that direct observation of LVAR at 6 months adds information to data from early CMR in predicting outcomes (C-statistic: 0.723 vs. 0.795). CONCLUSIONS: The definition of LVAR that best predicts adverse cardiovascular events should consider both the increase in LVEDV and the reduction in LV ejection fraction. However, assessment of LVAR does not improve information provided by the early CMR.
OBJECTIVES: This study sought to establish the best definition of left ventricular adverse remodeling (LVAR) to predict outcomes and determine whether its assessment adds prognostic information to that obtained by early cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR). BACKGROUND:LVAR, usually defined as an increase in left ventricular end-diastolic volume (LVEDV) is the main cause of heart failure after an ST-segment elevated myocardial infarction; however, the role of assessment of LVAR in predicting cardiovascular events remains controversial. METHODS:Patients with ST-segment elevated myocardial infarction who received percutaneous coronary intervention within 6 h of symptom onset were included (n = 498). CMR was performed during hospitalization (6.2 ± 2.6 days) and after 6 months (6.1 ± 1.8 months). The optimal threshold values of the LVEDV increase and the LV ejection fraction decrease associated with the primary endpoint were ascertained. Primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular mortality, hospitalization for heart failure, or ventricular arrhythmia. RESULTS: The study was completed by 374 patients. Forty-nine patients presented the primary endpoint during follow-up (72.9 ± 42.8 months). Values that maximized the ability to identify patients with and without outcomes were a relative rise in LVEDV of 15% (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.1; p = 0.007) and a relative fall in LV ejection fraction of 3% (HR: 2.5; p = 0.001). However, the predictive model (using C-statistic analysis) failed to demonstrate that direct observation of LVAR at 6 months adds information to data from early CMR in predicting outcomes (C-statistic: 0.723 vs. 0.795). CONCLUSIONS: The definition of LVAR that best predicts adverse cardiovascular events should consider both the increase in LVEDV and the reduction in LV ejection fraction. However, assessment of LVAR does not improve information provided by the early CMR.
Authors: Rob J van der Geest; Andrew J Swift; Samer Alabed; Faisal Alandejani; Krit Dwivedi; Kavita Karunasaagarar; Michael Sharkey; Pankaj Garg; Patrick J H de Koning; Attila Tóth; Yousef Shahin; Christopher Johns; Michail Mamalakis; Sarah Stott; David Capener; Steven Wood; Peter Metherall; Alexander M K Rothman; Robin Condliffe; Neil Hamilton; James M Wild; Declan P O'Regan; Haiping Lu; David G Kiely Journal: Radiology Date: 2022-06-14 Impact factor: 29.146
Authors: Ching-Hui Sia; Sock-Hwee Tan; Siew-Pang Chan; Stephanie Marchesseau; Hui-Wen Sim; Leonardo Carvalho; Ruth Chen; Nor Hanim Mohd Amin; Alan Yean-Yip Fong; Arthur Mark Richards; Christina Yip; Mark Y Chan Journal: Pharmaceuticals (Basel) Date: 2022-06-06
Authors: Marco Giuseppe Del Buono; Juan Ignacio Damonte; Juan Guido Chiabrando; Roshanak Markley; Jeremy Turlington; Cory R Trankle; Le Kang; Giuseppe Biondi-Zoccai; Benjamin W Van Tassell; Antonio Abbate Journal: J Cardiovasc Pharmacol Date: 2022-06-01 Impact factor: 3.271
Authors: Damien Legallois; Amir Hodzic; Joachim Alexandre; Charles Dolladille; Eric Saloux; Alain Manrique; Vincent Roule; Fabien Labombarda; Paul Milliez; Farzin Beygui Journal: Heart Fail Rev Date: 2022-01 Impact factor: 4.214
Authors: Pieter van der Bijl; Rachid Abou; Laurien Goedemans; Bernard J Gersh; David R Holmes; Nina Ajmone Marsan; Victoria Delgado; Jeroen J Bax Journal: ESC Heart Fail Date: 2020-02-14
Authors: Valentina Parisi; Serena Cabaro; Vittoria D'Esposito; Laura Petraglia; Maddalena Conte; Pasquale Campana; Gerardo Gerundo; Marianna Abitabile; Andrea Tuccillo; Maria Accadia; Giuseppe Comentale; Emanuele Pilato; Mario Sansone; Dario Leosco; Pietro Formisano Journal: Front Physiol Date: 2020-10-15 Impact factor: 4.566