In patients with known or suspected myocardial infarction (MI), cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) provides a comprehensive, multifaceted view of the heart. The data, including that from a recent multicenter clinical trial, indicate that delayed-enhancement cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (DE-CMR) is a well-validated, robust technique that can be easily implemented on scanners that are commonly available worldwide, with an effectiveness that clearly rivals the best available imaging techniques for the detection and assessment of acute and chronic MI. When patients present outside the diagnostic window of cardiac troponins, DE-CMR may be especially useful. Moreover, because DE-CMR can uniquely differentiate between ischemic and various nonischemic forms of myocardial injury, it may be helpful in cases of diagnostic uncertainty, such as in patients with classical features of MI in whom coronary angiography does not show a culprit lesion. Even after the diagnosis of MI has been made, CMR provides clinically relevant information by identifying residual viability, microvascular damage, stunning, and right ventricular infarction. In addition, post-MI sequelae, including left ventricular thrombus and pericarditis, are easily identified. Given that quantification of infarct size by DE-CMR is highly reproducible, this technique may provide a useful surrogate end point for clinical trials with appreciable reductions in sample size compared with alternative methods.
CMR feature-tracking-derived GLS is a powerful independent predictor of mortality in a multicenter population of patients with ischemic or nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy, incremental to common clinical and CMR risk factors including EF and LGE.
BACKGROUND
Stress cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) has demonstrated excellent diagnostic and prognostic value in single-center studies.
OBJECTIVES
This study sought to investigate the prognostic value of stress CMR and downstream costs from subsequent cardiac testing in a retrospective multicenter study in the United States.
METHODS
In this retrospective study, consecutive patients from 13 centers across 11 states who presented with a chest pain syndrome and were referred for stress CMR were followed for a target period of 4 years. The authors associated CMR findings with a primary outcome of cardiovascular death or nonfatal myocardial infarction using competing risk-adjusted regression models and downstream costs of ischemia testing using published Medicare national payment rates.
RESULTS
In this study, 2,349 patients (63 ± 11 years of age, 47% female) were followed for a median of 5.4 years. Patients with no ischemia or late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) by CMR, observed in 1,583 patients (67%), experienced low annualized rates of primary outcome (<1%) and coronary revascularization (1% to 3%), across all years of study follow-up. In contrast, patients with ischemia+/LGE+ experienced a >4-fold higher annual primary outcome rate and a >10-fold higher rate of coronary revascularization during the first year after CMR. Patients with ischemia and LGE both negative had low average annual cost spent on ischemia testing across all years of follow-up, and this pattern was similar across the 4 practice environments of the participating centers.
CONCLUSIONS
In a multicenter U.S. cohort with stable chest pain syndromes, stress CMR performed at experienced centers offers effective cardiac prognostication. Patients without CMR ischemia or LGE experienced a low incidence of cardiac events, little need for coronary revascularization, and low spending on subsequent ischemia testing. (Stress CMR Perfusion Imaging in the United States [SPINS]: A Society for Cardiovascular Resonance Registry Study;
NCT03192891
)
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.