Key result
Stress CMR-detected myocardial ischaemia is linked to ~303% greater MACE risk versus no ischaemia.
Why the study?
Exercise stress testing yields inconclusive results in up to 20% of patients, and data on using stress perfusion CMR in this group are limited.
Does the presence of inducible myocardial ischaemia on stress perfusion CMR predict major adverse cardiovascular events in patients with known or suspected CAD and inconclusive exercise stress testing?
Cohort (n=414)
Does the presence of inducible myocardial ischaemia on stress perfusion CMR predict major adverse cardiovascular events in patients with known or suspected CAD and inconclusive exercise stress testing?
Stress perfusion CMR effectively stratifies long-term cardiovascular risk in patients with known or suspected CAD who have inconclusive exercise stress testing results.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May refine risk stratification after inconclusive exercise tests; leaves open whether CMR-guided decisions improve outcomes.
Background Although exercise stress testing (EST) is commonly used for risk stratification in coronary artery disease (CAD), it yields inconclusive results in up to 20% of patients. Stress perfusion cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) is a comprehensive and accurate tool for evaluating CAD, but data on its use in patients with inconclusive EST results are limited. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the prognostic value of stress perfusion CMR in patients with inconclusive EST results. Methods Consecutive patients with known or suspected CAD and inconclusive EST results who were referred for stress perfusion CMR between 2009 and 2022 were studied. Patients were divided into two groups based on the presence or absence of inducible myocardial ischaemia, as determined by CMR. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), defined as a composite of cardiovascular death, acute coronary syndrome, hospitalisation for heart failure, and ischaemic stroke. Results A total of 414 patients (mean age 63±9 years, 48% male) were included, of whom 69 had myocardial ischaemia. Over a median follow-up of 6.9 years (IQR 4.5–9.9), 32 patients (7.7%) experienced MACE. Patients with myocardial ischaemia had a significantly higher annualised MACE rate than those without ischaemia (2.8 vs 0.8 per 100 patient-years, p<0.001). On multivariable analysis, myocardial ischaemia was an independent predictor of MACE (HR 4.03, 95% CI 1.94 to 8.38, p<0.001), along with atrial fibrillation (HR 5.83, 95% CI 1.69 to 20.09, p=0.005) and resting systolic blood pressure (HR 1.02, 95% CI 1.005 to 1.04, p=0.01). Subgroup analysis demonstrated a consistent association between myocardial ischaemia and increased MACE risk across most subgroups (all p for interaction >0.05). Conclusions Stress perfusion CMR demonstrated prognostic value and effectively stratified risk in patients with known or suspected CAD who had inconclusive EST results. Stress perfusion CMR represents a valuable tool for this patient population.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tanvisut et al. (2026) conducted a cohort in Known or suspected coronary artery disease with inconclusive exercise stress testing (n=414). Stress perfusion CMR with inducible myocardial ischaemia vs. Stress perfusion CMR without inducible myocardial ischaemia was evaluated on Major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), defined as a composite of cardiovascular death, acute coronary syndrome, hospitalisation for heart failure, and ischaemic stroke (HR 4.03, 95% CI 1.94 to 8.38, p=<0.001). Myocardial ischaemia detected by stress perfusion CMR was an independent predictor of MACE compared to no ischaemia (HR 4.03; 95% CI 1.94 to 8.38; p<0.001).
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: