Long-term prognostic value of late gadolinium enhancement and periprocedural myocardial infarction after uncomplicated revascularization: MASS-V follow-up

Imagem de Miniatura
Arquivos
art_LINHARES-FILHO_Longterm_prognostic_value_of_late_gadolinium_enhancement_and_2022.PDF (641.22 KB)
Citações na Scopus
2
Tipo de produção
article
Data de publicação
2022
DOI
Scopus
Web of Science
PubMed
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título do Volume
Editora
OXFORD UNIV PRESS
Autores
AZEVEDO, Diogo
Citação
EUROPEAN HEART JOURNAL-CARDIOVASCULAR IMAGING, v.23, n.2, p.255-265, 2022
Projetos de Pesquisa
Unidades Organizacionais
Fascículo
Resumo
Aims Cardiac biomarkers elevation is common after revascularization, even in absence of periprocedural myocardial infarction (PMI) detection by imaging methods. Thus, late gadolinium enhancement cardiac magnetic resonance (LGE-CMR) may be useful on PMI diagnosis and prognosis. We sought to evaluate long-term prognostic value of PMI and new LGE after revascularization. Methods and results Two hundred and two patients with multivessel coronary disease and preserved ventricular function who underwent elective revascularization were included, of whom 136 (67.3%) underwent coronary artery bypass grafting and 66 (32.7%) percutaneous coronary intervention. The median follow-up was 5 years (4.8-5.8 years). Cardiac biomarkers measurement and LGE-CMR were performed before and after procedures. The Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions definition was used to assess PMI. Primary endpoint was composed of death, infarction, additional revascularization, or cardiac hospitalization. Primary endpoint was observed in 29 (14.3%) patients, of whom 13 (14.9%) had PMI and 16 (13.9%) did not (P = 0.93). Thirty-six (17.8%) patients had new LGE. Twenty (12.0%) events occurred in patients without new LGE and 9 (25.2%) in patients with it (P = 0.045). LGE was also associated to increased mortality, with 4 (2.4%) and 4 (11.1%) deaths in subjects without and with it (P = 0.02). LGE was the only independent predictor of primary endpoint and mortality (P = 0.03 and P = 0.02). Median LGE mass was estimated at 4.6 g. Patients with new LGE had a greater biomarkers release (median troponin: 8.9 ng/mL vs. 1.8 ng/mL and median creatine kinase-MB: 38.0 ng/mL vs. 12.3 ng/mL; P < 0.001 in both comparisons). Conclusions New LGE was shown to be better prognostic predictor than biomarker-only PMI definition after uncomplicated revascularization. Furthermore, new LGE was the only independent predictor of cardiovascular events and mortality.
Palavras-chave
Coronary artery disease, Myocardial infarction, Cardiac imaging techniques, Biomarkers, Magnetic resonance imaging, prognosis
URI
https://observatorio.fm.usp.br/handle/OPI/45886
Referências
  1. Ben-Yehuda O, 2019, EUR HEART J, V40, P1930, DOI 10.1093/eurheartj/ehz113
  2. Califf RM, 1998, J AM COLL CARDIOL, V31, P241, DOI 10.1016/S0735-1097(97)00506-8
  3. Oikawa FTC, 2017, J CARDIOTHORAC SURG, V12, DOI 10.1186/s13019-017-0684-3
  4. Hueb W, 2016, ANN THORAC SURG, V101, P2202, DOI 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2015.11.034
  5. Husser O, 2013, INT J CARDIOVAS IMAG, V29, P1499, DOI 10.1007/s10554-013-0239-1
  6. Khan JN, 2017, WORLD J CARDIOL, V9, P109, DOI 10.4330/wjc.v9.i2.109
  7. Kim RJ, 2008, CIRCULATION, V117, P629, DOI 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.107.723262
  8. Kim RJ, 1999, CIRCULATION, V100, P1992, DOI 10.1161/01.CIR.100.19.1992
  9. Lansky AJ, 2010, CIRC-CARDIOVASC INTE, V3, P602, DOI 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.110.959080
  10. Levy JH, 2003, ANN THORAC SURG, V75, pS715, DOI 10.1016/S0003-4975(02)04701-X
  11. Moussa ID, 2013, J AM COLL CARDIOL, V62, P1563, DOI 10.1016/j.jacc.2013.08.720
  12. Ndrepepa G, 2016, J AM COLL CARDIOL, V68, P2259, DOI 10.1016/j.jacc.2016.08.059
  13. Patel VG, 2013, CIRC-CARDIOVASC IMAG, V6, P1102, DOI 10.1161/CIRCIMAGING.113.000448
  14. Prasad A, 2011, NEW ENGL J MED, V364, P453, DOI 10.1056/NEJMra0912134
  15. Rahimi K, 2009, HEART, V95, P1937, DOI 10.1136/hrt.2009.173302
  16. Ricciardi MJ, 2003, AM HEART J, V145, P522, DOI 10.1067/mhj.2003.2
  17. Ricciardi MJ, 2001, CIRCULATION, V103, P2780, DOI 10.1161/hc2301.092121
  18. Selvanayagam JB, 2005, CIRCULATION, V111, P1027, DOI 10.1161/01.CIR.0000156328.28485.AD
  19. Selvanayagam JB, 2005, J AM COLL CARDIOL, V45, P629, DOI 10.1016/j.jacc.2004.11.030
  20. Selvanayagam JB, 2004, CIRCULATION, V109, P345, DOI 10.1161/01.CIR.0000109489.71945.BD
  21. Shann KG, 2006, J THORAC CARDIOV SUR, V132, P283, DOI 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2006.03.027
  22. Shaw LJ, 2019, JACC-CARDIOVASC IMAG, V12, P1117, DOI 10.1016/j.jcmg.2019.05.001
  23. Thygesen K, 2018, CIRCULATION, V138, pE618, DOI [10.1016/j.gheart.2018.08.004, 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000617, 10.1093/eurheartj/ehy462, 10.1016/j.jacc.2018.08.1038, 10.1016/j.recesp.2018.11.011]
  24. van Kranenburg M, 2014, JACC-CARDIOVASC IMAG, V7, P930, DOI 10.1016/j.jcmg.2014.05.010
  25. Wu E, 2008, HEART, V94, P730, DOI 10.1136/hrt.2007.122622

Coleções
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - FM/MCP
Carregar mais