PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
March 21, 2016European Heart Journal - Cardiovascular Imaging54 citationsOpen Access

Multi-vendor, multicentre comparison of contrast-enhanced SSFP and T2-STIR CMR for determining myocardium at risk in ST-elevation myocardial infarction

View Full Paper
DNDavid NordlundGKGert KlugEHEinar Heiberg

Key Result

CE-SSFP yielded a higher proportion of diagnostic quality images than T2-STIR (97% vs 65%) for determining myocardium at risk in STEMI patients, while both provided similar MaR estimates.

Study Design

Type

Observational (n=223)

Multicenter

Yes

Structured PICO

Does CE-SSFP provide better diagnostic quality and similar estimation of myocardium at risk compared to T2-STIR in patients with STEMI?

P
Population
223 patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction who underwent CMR 1-8 days after percutaneous coronary intervention.
E
Exposure
Contrast-enhanced steady-state free precession magnetic resonance imaging (CE-SSFP)
C
Comparator
T2-short tau inversion recovery (T2-STIR) magnetic resonance imaging
O
Outcome
Diagnostic image quality and estimation of myocardium at risk (MaR)surrogate

CE-SSFP provides a higher rate of diagnostic quality images than T2-STIR for assessing myocardium at risk in STEMI patients, making it more suitable for multicenter clinical trials.

Main Result

Absolute Event Rate: 97% vs 65%

Abstract

AIMS: Myocardial salvage, determined by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR), is used as end point in cardioprotection trials. To calculate myocardial salvage, infarct size is related to myocardium at risk (MaR), which can be assessed by T2-short tau inversion recovery (T2-STIR) and contrast-enhanced steady-state free precession magnetic resonance imaging (CE-SSFP). We aimed to determine how T2-STIR and CE-SSFP perform in determining MaR when applied in multicentre, multi-vendor settings. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 215 patients from 17 centres were included after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for ST-elevation myocardial infarction. CMR was performed within 1-8 days. These patients participated in the MITOCARE or CHILL-MI cardioprotection trials. Additionally, 8 patients from a previous study, imaged 1 day post-CMR, were included. Late gadolinium enhancement, T2-STIR, and CE-SSFP images were acquired on 1.5T MR scanners (Philips, Siemens, or GE). In 65% of the patients, T2-STIR was of diagnostic quality compared with 97% for CE-SSFP. In diagnostic quality images, there was no difference in MaR by T2-STIR and CE-SSFP (bias: 0.02 ± 6%, P = 0.96, r(2) = 0.71, P < 0.001), or between treatment and control arms. No change in size or quality of MaR nor ability to identify culprit artery was seen over the first week after the acute event (P = 0.44). CONCLUSION: In diagnostic quality images, T2-STIR and CE-SSFP provide similar estimates of MaR, were constant over the first week, and were not affected by treatment. CE-SSFP had a higher degree of diagnostic quality images compared with T2 imaging for sequences from two out of three vendors. Therefore, CE-SSFP is currently more suitable for implementation in multicentre, multi-vendor clinical trials.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Nordlund et al. (2016) conducted an observational in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (n=223). CE-SSFP vs. T2-STIR was evaluated on Diagnostic quality of images. CE-SSFP yielded a higher proportion of diagnostic quality images than T2-STIR (97% vs 65%) for determining myocardium at risk in STEMI patients, while both provided similar MaR estimates.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a70635c5d37378ac1dd789bhttps://doi.org/10.1093/ehjci/jew027
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Myocardium at risk by magnetic resonance imaging: head-to-head comparison of T2-weighted imaging and contrast-enhanced steady-state free precession2012 · 39 citations
  2. 2Quantification of myocardium at risk in ST- elevation myocardial infarction: a comparison of contrast-enhanced steady-state free precession cine cardiovascular magnetic resonance with coronary angiographic jeopardy scores2016 · 7 citations
  3. 3Retrospective assessment of at-risk myocardium in reperfused acute myocardial infarction patients using contrast‐enhanced balanced steady‐state free‐precession cardiovascular magnetic resonance at 3T with SPECT validation2021 · 7 citations
  4. 4Assessment of myocardium at risk with contrast enhanced steady-state free precession cine cardiovascular magnetic resonance compared to single-photon emission computed tomography2010 · 76 citations
  5. 5Experimental validation of contrast-enhanced SSFP cine CMR for quantification of myocardium at risk in acute myocardial infarction2016 · 28 citations