The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging

, Volume 33, Issue 12, pp 2003–2012 | Cite as

Is cardiac magnetic resonance necessary for prediction of left ventricular remodeling in patients with reperfused ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction?

  • Eun Kyoung Kim
  • Young Bin Song
  • Sung-A Chang
  • Sung-Ji Park
  • Joo-Yong Hahn
  • Seung Hyuk Choi
  • Jin-Ho Choi
  • Hyeon-Cheol Gwon
  • Seung-Woo Park
  • Yeon Hyeon Choe
  • Joonghyun Ahn
  • Keumhee Carriere
  • Sang-Chol LeeEmail author
Original Paper


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.


ST-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.


  1. 1.
    Yeh RW, Sidney S, Chandra M, Sorel M, Selby JV, Go AS (2010) Population trends in the incidence and outcomes of acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 362:2155–2165CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Weir RA, McMurray JJ, Velazquez EJ (2006) Epidemiology of heart failure and left ventricular systolic dysfunction after acute myocardial infarction: prevalence, clinical characteristics, and prognostic importance. Am J Cardiol 97:13F–25FCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Heusch G, Libby P, Gersh B, Yellon D, Bohm M, Lopaschuk G et al (2014) Cardiovascular remodelling in coronary artery disease and heart failure. Lancet 383:1933–1943CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Pfeffer MA, Braunwald E (1990) Ventricular remodeling after myocardial infarction. Experimental observations and clinical implications. Circulation 81:1161–1172CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 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
  6. 6.
    Bauters A, Fertin M, Lamblin N, Pinet F, Bauters C (2011) White blood cell and peripheral blood mononuclear cell counts for the prediction of left ventricular remodeling after myocardial infarction. J Cardiol 58:197–198CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 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. 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. 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
  10. 10.
    Thiele H, Kappl MJ, Conradi S, Niebauer J, Hambrecht R, Schuler G (2006) Reproducibility of chronic and acute infarct size measurement by delayed enhancement-magnetic resonance imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol 47:1641–1645CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 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
  12. 12.
    Ndrepepa G, Mehilli J, Schulz S, Iijima R, Keta D, Byrne RA et al (2008) Prognostic significance of epicardial blood flow before and after percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with acute coronary syndromes. J Am Coll Cardiol 52:512–517CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Schroder R (2004) Prognostic impact of early ST-segment resolution in acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction. Circulation 110:e506–e510CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 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
  15. 15.
    Orn S, Manhenke C, Ueland T, Damas JK, Mollnes TE, Edvardsen T et al (2009) C-reactive protein, infarct size, microvascular obstruction, and left-ventricular remodelling following acute myocardial infarction. Eur Heart J 30:1180–1186CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Steg PG, James SK, Atar D, Badano LP, Blomstrom-Lundqvist C, Borger MA et al (2012) ESC Guidelines for the management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation. Eur Heart J 33:2569–2619CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    DeLong ER, DeLong DM, Clarke-Pearson DL (1988) Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach. Biometrics 44:837–845CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Cohn JN, Ferrari R, Sharpe N (2000) Cardiac remodeling–concepts and clinical implications: a consensus paper from an international forum on cardiac remodeling. Behalf of an International Forum on Cardiac Remodeling. J Am Coll Cardiol 35:569–582CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 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
  20. 20.
    Celic V, Dekleva M, Majstorovic A, Radivojevic N, Kostic N, Caparevic Z et al (2010) Myocardial performance index: prediction and monitoring of remodeling and functioning of the left ventricle after first myocardial infarction. Med Pregl 63:652–655CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 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. 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
  23. 23.
    Eitel I, Desch S, Fuernau G, Hildebrand L, Gutberlet M, Schuler G et al (2010) Prognostic significance and determinants of myocardial salvage assessed by cardiovascular magnetic resonance in acute reperfused myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol 55:2470–2479CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 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
  25. 25.
    Protti A, Dong X, Sirker A, Botnar R, Shah AM (2012) MRI-based prediction of adverse cardiac remodeling after murine myocardial infarction. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol 303:H309–H314CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Choi KM, Kim RJ, Gubernikoff G, Vargas JD, Parker M, Judd RM (2001) Transmural extent of acute myocardial infarction predicts long-term improvement in contractile function. Circulation 104:1101–1107CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Fieno DS, Kim RJ, Chen EL, Lomasney JW, Klocke FJ, Judd RM (2000) Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of myocardium at risk: distinction between reversible and irreversible injury throughout infarct healing. J Am Coll Cardiol 36:1985–1991CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kim RJ, Fieno DS, Parrish TB, Harris K, Chen EL, Simonetti O et al (1999) Relationship of MRI delayed contrast enhancement to irreversible injury, infarct age, and contractile function. Circulation 100:1992–2002CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    de Waha S, Eitel I, Desch S, Fuernau G, Lurz P, Stiermaier T et al (2014) Prognosis after ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a study on cardiac magnetic resonance imaging versus clinical routine. Trials 15:249CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Eun Kyoung Kim
    • 1
  • Young Bin Song
    • 1
  • Sung-A Chang
    • 1
  • Sung-Ji Park
    • 1
  • Joo-Yong Hahn
    • 1
  • Seung Hyuk Choi
    • 1
  • Jin-Ho Choi
    • 1
  • Hyeon-Cheol Gwon
    • 1
  • Seung-Woo Park
    • 1
  • Yeon Hyeon Choe
    • 2
  • Joonghyun Ahn
    • 3
  • Keumhee Carriere
    • 3
    • 4
  • Sang-Chol Lee
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Division of Cardiology, Heart Vascular Stroke Institute, Samsung Medical CenterSungkyunkwan University School of MedicineSeoulRepublic of Korea
  2. 2.Department of Radiology, Heart Vascular Stroke Institute, Samsung Medical CenterSungkyunkwan University School of MedicineSeoulRepublic of Korea
  3. 3.Statistics and Data Center, Samsung Medical CenterSeoulRepublic of Korea
  4. 4.Department of Mathematical and Statistical SciencesUniversity of AlbertaEdmontonCanada

Personalised recommendations