Article ID | Journal | Published Year | Pages | File Type |
---|---|---|---|---|
2862278 | The American Journal of Cardiology | 2006 | 6 Pages |
Abstract
End-diastolic wall thickness (EDWT) and thickness of the residual non-contrast-enhanced myocardial rim have been suggested as markers for the assessment of myocardial viability by cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging. This study compared these parameters as derived from contrast-enhanced CMR images for the prediction of myocardial viability as determined by fluorine-18 deoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET). Twenty-two patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy (ejection fraction 31 ± 11%) were investigated. For contrast-enhanced CMR imaging, a standard inversion-recovery sequence was used. FDG-PET was performed using a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp. Data were analyzed with a 17-segment model. Of 146 severely dysfunctional segments, 112 were assessed as viable and 34 as nonviable by nuclear imaging. Using receiver-operator characteristic analysis, areas under the curve were 0.95 for unenhanced myocardial rim (95% confidence interval 0.92 to 0.98) and 0.86 for EDWT (95% confidence interval 0.80 to 0.93, p <0.001 vs unenhanced myocardial rim) for the prediction of viability as assessed by FDG-PET. Cutoffs of 5.4 mm for EDWT and 3.0 mm for unenhanced myocardial rim were found to optimally differentiate viability by FDG-PET. In 25 segments with divergent results, 94% of segments with an EDWT â¤5.4 mm and an unenhanced myocardial rim >3.0 mm were scored as viable by FDG-PET, whereas 57% of segments with an EDWT >5.4 mm and an unenhanced myocardial rim â¤3.0 mm were scored nonviable with the reference technique. In conclusion, unenhanced myocardial rim is superior to EDWT for the prediction of myocardial viability as determined by FDG-PET and may be clinically useful for assessment of myocardial viability in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy and regional wall thinning.
Related Topics
Health Sciences
Medicine and Dentistry
Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
Authors
Harald Peter MD, Arno MD, Aernout MD, Frans MD, PhD, Peter MD, Albert MD, PhD,