Is cardiac magnetic resonance necessary for prediction of left ventricular remodeling in patients with reperfused ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction?
As cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) has become widely used for evaluation of myocardial viability after acute myocardial infarction, the additional value of CMR parameters for prediction of left ventricle (LV) remodeling has been receiving interest. The aim of the study was to investigate the additional predictive value of CMR parameters for LV remodeling after successful reperfusion of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) using multiple predictive models. LV remodeling was defined as ≥20% increase in end-diastolic volume at 6 month follow-up echocardiography. Using multiple stepwise regression analysis, conventional risk model was classified as following; model 1 (clinical factors), model 2 (model 1 + angiographic factors), model 3 (model 2 + echocardiographic factors) and CMR-added model; model 4 (model 3 + CMR factors). Among 262 enrolled patients, 25.1% showed LV remodeling. There were significant increments of c-statistics from the predictive model 1 to model 3 (AUC; 0.675 [0.60–0.75], 0.708 [0.64–0.78], 0.756 [0.69–0.82], respectively. all p < 0.05). However, model 4, which added the CMR variables, did not show any increase in predictive value compared with model 3 (AUC; 0.763 [0.70–0.83] versus 0.756 [0.69–0.82], p = 0.11). During the 28.2 months of median follow up, the incidence of hospitalization for heart failure was significantly higher in the patients with LV remodeling (6.1% vs. 0.5%, p = 0.02). CMR parameters did not provide incremental predictive value above the assessment by conventional echocardiography-based risk model in patients with STEMI.
KeywordsST-segment elevation myocardial infarction Ventricular remodeling Cardiac magnetic resonance Echocardiography Coronary angiography
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
All authors have no conflict of interest or financial ties to disclose.
- 5.St John Sutton M, Pfeffer MA, Plappert T, Rouleau JL, Moye LA, Dagenais GR et al (1994) Quantitative two-dimensional echocardiographic measurements are major predictors of adverse cardiovascular events after acute myocardial infarction. The protective effects of captopril. Circulation 89:68–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 7.Urbano-Moral JA, Lopez-Haldon JE, Fernandez M, Mancha F, Sanchez A, Rodriguez-Puras MJ et al (2012) Prognostic value of different serum biomarkers for left ventricular remodelling after ST-elevation myocardial infarction treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Heart 98:1153–1159CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 8.Kelly D, Khan SQ, Thompson M, Cockerill G, Ng LL, Samani N et al (2008) Plasma tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase-1 and matrix metalloproteinase-9: novel indicators of left ventricular remodelling and prognosis after acute myocardial infarction. Eur Heart J 29:2116–2124CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 9.Bochenek T, Wita K, Tabor Z, Grabka M, Krzych L, Wrobel W et al (2011) Value of speckle-tracking echocardiography for prediction of left ventricular remodeling in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction treated by primary percutaneous intervention. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 24:1342–1348CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 11.Damman P, Beijk MA, Kuijt WJ, Verouden NJ, van Geloven N, Henriques JP et al (2011) Multiple biomarkers at admission significantly improve the prediction of mortality in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention for acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol 57:29–36CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 14.Morrow DA, Antman EM, Charlesworth A, Cairns R, Murphy SA, de Lemos JA et al (2000) TIMI risk score for ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a convenient, bedside, clinical score for risk assessment at presentation: an intravenous nPA for treatment of infarcting myocardium early II trial substudy. Circulation 102:2031–2037CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 19.Larose E, Rodes-Cabau J, Pibarot P, Rinfret S, Proulx G, Nguyen CM et al (2010) Predicting late myocardial recovery and outcomes in the early hours of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction traditional measures compared with microvascular obstruction, salvaged myocardium, and necrosis characteristics by cardiovascular magnetic resonance. J Am Coll Cardiol 55:2459–2469CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 21.Galiuto L, Garramone B, Scara A, Rebuzzi AG, Crea F, La Torre G et al (2008) The extent of microvascular damage during myocardial contrast echocardiography is superior to other known indexes of post-infarct reperfusion in predicting left ventricular remodeling: results of the multicenter AMICI study. J Am Coll Cardiol 51:552–559.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 22.de Waha S, Desch S, Eitel I, Fuernau G, Zachrau J, Leuschner A et al (2010) Impact of early vs. late microvascular obstruction assessed by magnetic resonance imaging on long-term outcome after ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a comparison with traditional prognostic markers. Eur Heart J 31:2660–2668CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 24.Wu E, Ortiz JT, Tejedor P, Lee DC, Bucciarelli-Ducci C, Kansal P et al (2008) Infarct size by contrast enhanced cardiac magnetic resonance is a stronger predictor of outcomes than left ventricular ejection fraction or end-systolic volume index: prospective cohort study. Heart 94:730–736CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar