Contrast-enhanced adenosine-stress magnetic resonance imaging--feasibility and practicability of a protocol for detection or exclusion of ischemic heart disease in an outpatient setting

Safety, feasibility, and hemodynamic response of regadenoson for stress perfusion CMR

Owing to its pharmacodynamics and posology, the use of regadenoson for stress cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) has potential advantages over other vasodilators. We sought to evaluate the safety, hemodynamic response and diagnostic performance of regadenoson stress-CMR in routine clinical practice. All regadenoson stress-CMR examinations performed between May 2017 and July 2020 at our institution were retrospectively reviewed. A total of 698 studies were included for the final analysis. A conventional stress/rest protocol was performed using a 1.5T MRI scanner (Magnetom Aera, Siemens Healthineers, Erlangen, Germany). Adverse events, clinical symptoms, and hemodynamic response were assessed. Diagnostic accuracy of the test was evaluated in patients who underwent invasive coronary angiography. Nearly half of patients (48.5%) remained asymptomatic. Most common clinical symptoms included dyspnea (137, 19.6%), chest pain (116, 16.6%) and flushing (44, 6.3%). Two patients (0.28%) could not complete the examination due to severe hypotension or unbearable chest pain. Overall, an increase in heart rate (HR) response (36.2% [IQR: 22.5?50.9]) and a decrease in systolic and diastolic blood pressure (BP) (median systolic BP response of -5% [IQR: -11.5-0.6]; median diastolic BP response of -6.3 mmHg [IQR: -13.4-0]) was observed. Patients with symptoms induced by regadenoson showed higher HR response (40.3%, IQR: 26.4?56.1 vs. 32.4%, IQR: 19-45.6, p < 0.001), whereas a blunted HR response was observed in diabetic (29.6%, IQR: 18.4?42 p < 0.001), obese (31.7%, IQR: 20.7?46.2 p = 0.005) and patients aged 70 years or older (32.9%, IQR: 22.6?43.1 p < 0.001). Overall, regadenoson stress-CMR showed 95.65% (IQ 91.49?99.81) sensitivity, 54.84% (IQ 35.71?73.97) specificity, 86.99% (IQ 82.74?94.68) positive predictive value, and 77.27% (IQ 57.49?97.06) negative predictive value for detecting significant coronary stenosis as compared with invasive coronary angiography. Regadenoson is a well-tolerated vasodilator that can be safely employed for stress perfusion CMR, with high diagnostic performance.

Safety and tolerability of regadenoson CMR

AIMS

Knowledge of adverse events associated with regadenoson perfusion cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) and patient tolerability has implications for patient safety and staff training. We sought to assess the safety and tolerability of regadenoson stress CMR.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A group of 728 consecutive patients (median age 58, 44% female) and 25 normal volunteers (median age 21, 24% female) were recruited from August 2009 to March 2012 using a prospective, cross-sectional study design. Subjects were stressed using fixed-dose regadenoson and imaged using a 1.5T MRI scanner. Symptoms and adverse events including death, myocardial infarction (MI), ventricular tachycardia (VT)/ventricular fibrillation (VF), hospitalization, arrhythmias, and haemodynamic stability were assessed.

RESULTS

There were no occurrences of death, MI, VT/VF, high-grade atrioventricular block, or stress-induced atrial fibrillation. Notable adverse events included one case of bronchospasm and one case of heart failure exacerbation resulting in hospitalization. The most common symptoms in patients were dyspnoea (30%, n = 217), chest discomfort (27%, n = 200), and headache (15%, n = 111). There was minimal change between baseline and peak systolic and diastolic blood pressure in both patients and volunteers (P > 0.05). A blunted heart rate response to regadenoson was noted in patients with body mass index (BMI) ≥ 30 kg/m(2) (P < 0.001), and diabetes (P = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Regadenoson CMR is well tolerated and can be performed safely with few adverse events.

Stress cardiovascular MR in routine clinical practice: referral patterns, accuracy, tolerance, safety and incidental findings

OBJECTIVE

The use of stress cardiovascular MR (CMR) to evaluate myocardial ischaemia has increased significantly over recent years. We aimed to assess the indications, incidental findings, tolerance, safety and accuracy of stress CMR in routine clinical practice.

METHODS

We retrospectively examined all stress CMR studies performed at our tertiary referral centre over a 20-month period. Patients were scanned at 1.5 T, using a standardised protocol with routine imaging for late gadolinium enhancement. Angiograms of patients were assessed by an interventional cardiologist blinded to the CMR data.

RESULTS

654 patients were scanned (mean age 65±29 years; 63 inpatients; 9.6%). 14% of patients had incidental extracardiac findings, the commonest being liver or renal cysts (6%) and pulmonary nodules (4%). 639 patients (97.7%) received intravenous adenosine, 10 received intravenous dobutamine and 5 patients had both. Of the 15 patients who received dobutamine, 12 had no side-effects/complications, 2 experienced nausea and 1 chest tightness. Of the 644 patients who received adenosine, 43% experienced minor symptoms, 1% had transient heart block and 0.2% had severe bronchospasm requiring termination of infusion. There were no cases of hospitalisation or myocardial infarction. 241 patients also had coronary angiography. For detecting at least moderate stenosis of ≥50%, sensitivity was 86%, specificity 98% and accuracy 89%. For detecting severe stenoses of ≥70%, sensitivity was 91%, specificity 86% and overall accuracy 90%. These results compare very favourably with previous smaller research studies and meta-analyses.

CONCLUSION

We conclude that stress CMR, with adenosine as the main stress agent, is well tolerated, safe and accurate in routine clinical practice.