• Title of article

    Assessment of Myocardial Scarring Improves Risk Stratification in Patients Evaluated for Cardiac Defibrillator Implantation

  • Author/Authors

    Klem، نويسنده , , Igor and Weinsaft، نويسنده , , Jonathan W. and Bahnson، نويسنده , , Tristram D. and Hegland، نويسنده , , Don and Kim، نويسنده , , Han W. and Hayes، نويسنده , , Brenda and Parker، نويسنده , , Michele A. and Judd، نويسنده , , Robert M. and Kim، نويسنده , , Raymond J.، نويسنده ,

  • Issue Information
    روزنامه با شماره پیاپی سال 2012
  • Pages
    13
  • From page
    408
  • To page
    420
  • Abstract
    Objectives ted whether an assessment of myocardial scarring by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) would improve risk stratification in patients evaluated for implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantation. ound t sudden cardiac death risk stratification emphasizes left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF); however, most patients suffering sudden cardiac death have a preserved LVEF, and many with poor LVEF do not benefit from ICD prophylaxis. s ndred thirty-seven patients undergoing evaluation for possible ICD placement were prospectively enrolled and underwent cardiac MRI assessment of LVEF and scar. The pre-specified primary endpoint was death or appropriate ICD discharge for sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmia. s a median follow-up of 24 months the primary endpoint occurred in 39 patients. Whereas the rate of adverse events steadily increased with decreasing LVEF, a sharp step-up was observed for scar size >5% of left ventricular mass (hazard ratio [HR]: 5.2; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.0 to 13.3). On multivariable Cox proportional hazards analysis, including LVEF and electrophysiological-study results, scar size (as a continuous variable or dichotomized at 5%) was an independent predictor of adverse outcome. Among patients with LVEF >30%, those with significant scarring (>5%) had higher risk than those with minimal or no (≤5%) scarring (HR: 6.3; 95% CI: 1.4 to 28.0). Those with LVEF >30% and significant scarring had risk similar to patients with LVEF ≤30% (p = 0.56). Among patients with LVEF ≤30%, those with significant scarring again had higher risk than those with minimal or no scarring (HR: 3.9; 95% CI: 1.2 to 13.1). Those with LVEF ≤30% and minimal scarring had risk similar to patients with LVEF >30% (p = 0.71). sions dial scarring detected by cardiac MRI is an independent predictor of adverse outcome in patients being considered for ICD placement. In patients with LVEF >30%, significant scarring (>5% LV) identifies a high-risk cohort similar in risk to those with LVEF ≤30%. Conversely, in patients with LVEF ≤30%, minimal or no scarring identifies a low-risk cohort similar to those with LVEF >30%.
  • Keywords
    implantable cardioverter-defibrillator , myocardial scarring , cardiovascular magnetic resonance
  • Journal title
    JACC (Journal of the American College of Cardiology)
  • Serial Year
    2012
  • Journal title
    JACC (Journal of the American College of Cardiology)
  • Record number

    1754448