Key result
CMR-derived myocardial blood flow outperforms invasive coronary angiography for detecting cardiac allograft vasculopathy.
Why the study?
Does multiparametric CMR improve the detection of cardiac allograft vasculopathy compared to invasive coronary angiography in heart transplant recipients?
Cross-Sectional (n=48)
No
Does multiparametric CMR improve the detection of cardiac allograft vasculopathy compared to invasive coronary angiography in heart transplant recipients?
p-value: p=0.01
Noninvasive CMR-based absolute myocardial blood flow assessment detects cardiac allograft vasculopathy more accurately than invasive coronary angiography, the current clinical surveillance standard.
OBJECTIVES: This study sought to evaluate the diagnostic performance of multiparametric cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) for detecting cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV) using contemporary invasive epicardial artery and microvascular assessment techniques as reference standards, and to compare the performance of CMR with that of angiography. BACKGROUND: CAV continues to limit the long-term survival of heart transplant recipients. Coronary angiography has a Class I recommendation for CAV surveillance and annual or biannual surveillance angiography is performed routinely in most centers. METHODS: All transplant recipients referred for surveillance angiography at a single UK center over a 2-year period were prospectively screened for study eligibility. Patients prospectively underwent coronary angiography followed by coronary intravascular ultrasound, fractional flow reserve, and index of microcirculatory resistance. Within 1 month, patients underwent multiparametric CMR, including assessment of regional and global ventricular function, absolute myocardial blood flow quantification, and myocardial tissue characterization. In addition, 10 healthy volunteers underwent CMR. RESULTS: Forty-eight patients were recruited, median 7.1 years (interquartile range: 4.6 to 10.3 years) since transplantation. The CMR myocardial perfusion reserve was the only independent predictor of both epicardial (β = -0.57, p < 0.001) and microvascular disease (β = -0.60, p < 0.001) on stepwise multivariable regression. The CMR myocardial perfusion reserve significantly outperformed angiography for detecting moderate CAV (area under the curve, 0.89 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.79 to 1.00] vs. 0.59 [95% CI: 0.42 to 0.77], p = 0.01) and severe CAV (area under the curve, 0.88 [95% CI: 0.78 to 0.98] vs. 0.67 [95% CI: 0.52 to 0.82], p = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: CAV, including epicardial and microvascular components, can be detected more accurately using noninvasive CMR-based absolute myocardial blood flow assessment than with invasive coronary angiography, the current clinical surveillance technique.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Miller et al. (2013) conducted a cross-sectional in Cardiac allograft vasculopathy (n=48). Multiparametric cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) vs. Invasive coronary angiography was evaluated on Detection of moderate cardiac allograft vasculopathy (p=0.01). Noninvasive CMR-based absolute myocardial blood flow assessment outperformed invasive coronary angiography for detecting moderate (AUC 0.89 vs 0.59; P=0.01) and severe CAV (AUC 0.88 vs 0.67; P=0.05).
Synapse has enriched 2 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: