Why the study?
Does LDD-CMR predict segmental and global left ventricular functional recovery better than LGE-CMR in patients undergoing revascularisation?
Does LDD-CMR predict segmental and global left ventricular functional recovery better than LGE-CMR in patients undergoing revascularisation?
LDD-CMR provides superior predictive value over LGE-CMR for segmental left ventricular functional recovery after revascularisation, particularly in segments with intermediate (26-75%) scar burden.
May refine viability assessment in intermediate scar segments; hypothesis-generating for revascularisation decisions pending prospective trials.
LDD-CMR is superior to LGE-CMR as a predictor of segmental recovery. The advantage is greatest in the segments with an LGE from 26% to 75%. The RIM cut-off value of 4 mm had no superiority over the LGE cut-off value of 50% in predicting the segmental recovery. Patients with ≥ 50% of viable segments from all dysfunctional and revascularised had a tendency to improve LVEF by ≥ 5% after revascularisation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Glaveckaitė et al. (2011) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: