Long-Term Prognostic Value of Stress Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance in Patients With History of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Prognostic Value of Stress Perfusion Cardiac MRI in Cardiovascular Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Effects of the Scanner, Stress Agent, and Analysis Technique

Purpose To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the prognostic value of stress perfusion cardiac MRI in predicting cardiovascular outcomes. Materials and Methods A systematic literature search from the inception of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure until January 2023 was performed for articles that reported the prognosis of stress perfusion cardiac MRI in predicting cardiovascular outcomes. The quality of included studies was assessed using the Quality in Prognosis Studies tool. Reported hazard ratios (HRs) of univariable regression analyses with 95% CIs were pooled. Comparisons were performed across different analysis techniques (qualitative, semiquantitative, and fully quantitative), magnetic field strengths (1.5 T vs 3 T), and stress agents (dobutamine, adenosine, and dipyridamole). Results Thirty-eight studies with 58 774 patients with a mean follow-up time of 53 months were included. There were 1.9 all-cause deaths and 3.5 major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) per 100 patient-years. Stress-inducible ischemia was associated with a higher risk of all-cause mortality (HR: 2.55 [95% CI: 1.89, 3.43]) and MACE (HR: 3.90 [95% CI: 2.69, 5.66]). For MACE, pooled HRs of qualitative, semiquantitative, and fully quantitative methods were 4.56 (95% CI: 2.88, 7.22), 3.22 (95% CI: 1.60, 6.48), and 1.78 (95% CI: 1.39, 2.28), respectively. For all-cause mortality, there was no evidence of a difference between qualitative and fully quantitative methods (P = .79). Abnormal stress perfusion cardiac MRI findings remained prognostic when subgrouped based on underlying disease, stress agent, and field strength, with HRs of 3.54, 2.20, and 3.38, respectively, for all-cause mortality and 3.98, 3.56, and 4.21, respectively, for MACE. There was no evidence of subgroup differences in prognosis between field strengths or stress agents. There was significant heterogeneity in effect size for MACE outcomes in the subgroups assessing qualitative versus quantitative stress perfusion analysis, underlying disease, and field strength. Conclusion Stress perfusion cardiac MRI is valuable for predicting cardiovascular outcomes, regardless of the analysis method, stress agent, or magnetic field strength used. Keywords: MR-Perfusion, MRI, Cardiac, Meta-Analysis, Stress Perfusion, Cardiac MR, Cardiovascular Disease, Prognosis, Quantitative © RSNA, 2024 Supplemental material is available for this article.

Perfusion Imaging for the Heart

The use of myocardial perfusion imaging during a stress cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) examination for the evaluation of coronary artery disease is now recommended by both US and European guidelines. Several studies have demonstrated high diagnostic accuracy for the detection of hemodynamically significant coronary artery disease. Stress perfusion CMR has been shown to be a noninvasive and cost-effective alternative to guide coronary revascularization.

Review and critical appraisal of the indications for cardiac magnetic resonance imaging in the ESC guidelines

Cardiac MRI has made significant advances in the past decade, becoming an important technique for the evaluation of various cardiac pathologies. The aim of this document is to review the current indications for performing cardiac MRI based on the current ESC guidelines for STEMI, NSTEMI, chronic coronary artery disease, heart failure, arrhythmias, sudden cardiac death, valvular heart disease, pericardial disease and congenital heart disease. The review discusses the diagnostic and prognostic value of cMR for numerous cardiac diseases, and its important value in assessing structural heart disease and predicting arrhythmia risk. Additionally, it reflects upon the appropriateness of the guidelines and points out areas where the indications should be revised in future editions, based on the author's personal opinion. It is suggested that guideline criteria for the use of cMR should be more explicit to promote its use and lead to more specific reimbursements. However, further studies are needed to even better document the value of cMR in the future.

Long-Term Prognostic Value of Stress Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance-Related Coronary Revascularization to Predict Death: A Large Registry With >200 000 Patient-Years of Follow-Up

BACKGROUND

Although the benefit of coronary revascularization in patients with stable coronary disease is debated, data assessing the potential interest of stress cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) to guide coronary revascularization are limited. We aimed to assess the long-term prognostic value of stress CMR-related coronary revascularization in consecutive patients from a large registry.

METHODS

Between 2008 and 2018, a retrospective cohort study with a median follow-up of 6.0 years (interquartile range, 5.0-8.0) included all consecutive patients referred for stress CMR. CMR-related coronary revascularization was defined by any coronary revascularization performed within 90 days after CMR. The primary outcome was all-cause death based on the National Death Registry.

RESULTS

Among the 31 762 consecutive patients (mean age 63.7±12.1 years and 65.7% males), 2679 (8.4%) died at 206 453 patient-years of follow-up. Inducible ischemia and late gadolinium enhancement by CMR were associated with death (both P<0.001). In multivariable Cox regression, inducible ischemia and late gadolinium enhancement were independent predictors of death (hazard ratio, 1.61 [99.5% CI, 1.41-1.84]; hazard ratio, 1.62 [99.5% CI, 1.41-1.86], respectively; P<0.001). In the overall population, CMR-related coronary revascularization was an independent predictor of greater survival (hazard ratio, 0.58 [99.5% CI, 0.46-0.74]; P<0.001). In 1680, 1:1 matched patients using a limited number of variables (840 revascularized, 840 nonrevascularized), CMR-related revascularization was associated with a lower incidence of death in patients with severe inducible ischemia (≥6 segments, P<0.001) but showed no benefit in patients with mild or moderate ischemia (<6 segments, P=0.109). Using multivariable analysis in the propensity-matched population, CMR-related revascularization remained an independent predictor of a lower incidence of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 0.66 [99.5% CI, 0.54-0.80], P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In this large observational series of consecutive patients, stress perfusion CMR had important incremental long-term prognostic value to predict death over traditional risk factors. CMR-related revascularization was associated with a lower incidence of death in patients with severe ischemia.