Key result
Contrast-enhanced CMR outperforms SPECT for detecting acute MI with 97% sensitivity.
Why the study?
SPECT is widely accepted for detection and estimation of myocardial infarction, but contrast-enhanced CMR offers technical advantages as a promising method for identifying infarcted tissue.
Does contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging improve the detection of myocardial necrosis compared to single-photon emission computed tomography in patients early after acute myocardial infarction?
Observational (n=78)
Does contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging improve the detection of myocardial necrosis compared to single-photon emission computed tomography in patients early after acute myocardial infarction?
Absolute Event Rate: 97% vs 87%
p-value: p=0.008
CMR is superior to SPECT for detecting myocardial necrosis early after reperfused AMI, particularly for small, non-anterior, and non-Q-wave infarcts.
May support CMR preference for post-AMI necrosis detection; leaves open need for outcome trials before practice change.
OBJECTIVES This study sought to evaluate the diagnostic value of contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) and single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) for detection of myocardial necrosis after acute myocardial infarction (AMI). BACKGROUND Single-photon emission computed tomography is widely accepted in the clinical setting for detection and estimation of myocardial infarction. Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging offers technical advantages and is therefore a promising new method for identification of infarcted tissue. METHODS Seventy-eight patients with AMI were examined by CMR and SPECT 7 days after percutaneous coronary intervention. Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging and SPECT images were scored for presence and location of infarction using a 17-segment model. Results were compared with the peak troponin T level, electrocardiographic, and angiographic findings. RESULTS Acute myocardial infarction was detected significantly more often by CMR than SPECT (overall sensitivity: 97% vs. 87%; p = 0.008). Sensitivity of CMR was superior to SPECT in detecting small infarction as assessed by the peak troponin T level <3.0 ng/ml (92 vs. 69%; p = 0.03), and infarction in non-anterior location (98% vs. 84%; p = 0.03). Non-Q-wave infarctions were more likely to be detected by CMR (sensitivity 85% vs. 46%; p = 0.06). While CMR offered high sensitivity for detection of AMI irrespective of the infarct-related artery, SPECT was less sensitive, particularly within the left circumflex artery territory. CONCLUSIONS Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging is superior to SPECT in detecting myocardial necrosis after reperfused AMI because CMR detects small infarcts that were missed by SPECT independent of the infarct location. Thus, CMR is attractive for accurate detection and assessment of the myocardial infarct region in patients early after AMI.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ibrahim et al. (2006) conducted an observational in Acute myocardial infarction (n=78). Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) vs. Single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) was evaluated on Detection of acute myocardial infarction (overall sensitivity) (p=0.008). Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging was superior to SPECT for detecting acute myocardial infarction, with an overall sensitivity of 97% versus 87% (p=0.008).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: