Aminophylline shortage and current recommendations for reversal of vasodilator stress: an ASNC information statement endorsed by SCMR

Supply Issues in Nuclear Medicine

ABSTRACT

Issues related to the distribution and availability of supplies and personnel in nuclear medicine are well known and episodic. The combination of COVID-related restrictions and the unprecedented growth of our specialty have acutely exacerbated these supply and demand mismatches.

Prognostic value of regadenoson stress myocardial perfusion imaging in patients with left bundle branch block or ventricular paced rhythm

BACKGROUND

Vasodilator stress myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) is the provocative test of choice in patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB) or ventricular paced (V-paced) rhythm. The prognostic value of regadenoson SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) in these patients has not been studied.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 562 patients [mean age, 69 ± 11 years; men, 53.3%] with LBBB (50.7%) or V-paced rhythm (49.3%) who underwent regadenoson stress SPECT-MPI. There were 321 (57.1%) subjects with abnormal MPI and 192 (34.2%) with myocardial ischemia. During a mean follow-up of 2.5 ± 1.9 years, 39 (6.9%) patients had a major adverse cardiac event (MACE), defined as cardiac death or myocardial infarction. The annualized MACE rate in patients with normal MPI was 0.9% (LBBB, 0.8%; V-paced, 1.0%). There was a significant stepwise increase in MACE rates with increasing burdens of perfusion abnormality (P < 0.001) and myocardial ischemia (P = 0.001). Increased risk with abnormal MPI [adjusted hazard ratio, 4.26; P = 0.001] and myocardial ischemia [adjusted hazard ratio, 2.70; P = 0.003] was independent of and incremental to important clinical covariates. Abnormal MPI and myocardial ischemia predicted MACE similarly in both LBBB and V-paced subgroups (interaction P values > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

In patients with LBBB and V-paced rhythm, regadenoson stress SPECT-MPI provides independent and incremental prognostic value in predicting adverse cardiac events.

Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance: 2017/2018 in review

There were 89 articles published in the Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (JCMR) in 2017, including 76 original research papers, 4 reviews, 5 technical notes, 1 guideline, and 3 corrections. The volume was down slightly from 2017 with a corresponding 15% decrease in manuscript submissions from 405 to 346 and thus reflects a slight increase in the acceptance rate from 25 to 26%. The decrease in submissions for the year followed the initiation of the increased author processing charge (APC) for Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (SCMR) members for manuscripts submitted after June 30, 2018. The quality of the submissions continues to be high. The 2018 JCMR Impact Factor (which is published in June 2019) was slightly lower at 5.1 (vs. 5.46 for 2017; as published in June 2018. The 2018 impact factor means that on average, each JCMR published in 2016 and 2017 was cited 5.1 times in 2018. Our 5 year impact factor was 5.82.In accordance with Open-Access publishing guidelines of BMC, the JCMR articles are published on-line in a continuus fashion in the chronologic order of acceptance, with no collating of the articles into sections or special thematic issues. For this reason, over the years, the Editors have felt that it is useful for the JCMR audience to annually summarize the publications into broad areas of interest or themes, so that readers can view areas of interest in a single article in relation to each other and contemporaneous JCMR publications. In this publication, the manuscripts are presented in broad themes and set in context with related literature and previously published JCMR papers to guide continuity of thought within the journal. In addition, as in the past two years, I have used this publication to also convey information regarding the editorial process and as a "State of our JCMR."This is the 12th year of JCMR as an open-access publication with BMC (formerly known as Biomed Central). The timing of the JCMR transition to the open access platform was "ahead of the curve" and a tribute to the vision of Dr. Matthias Friedrich, the SCMR Publications Committee Chair and Dr. Dudley Pennell, the JCMR editor-in-chief at the time. The open-access system has dramatically increased the reading and citation of JCMR publications and I hope that you, our authors, will continue to send your very best, high quality manuscripts to JCMR for consideration. It takes a village to run a journal and I thank our very dedicated Associate Editors, Guest Editors, Reviewers for their efforts to ensure that the review process occurs in a timely and responsible manner. These efforts have allowed the JCMR to continue as the premier journal of our field. This entire process would also not be possible without the dedication and efforts of our managing editor, Diana Gethers. Finally, I thank you for entrusting me with the editorship of the JCMR as I begin my 4th year as your editor-in-chief. It has been a tremendous experience for me and the opportunity to review manuscripts that reflect the best in our field remains a great joy and highlight of my week!

Pharmacologic stress cardiovascular magnetic resonance in the pediatric population: A review of the literature, proposed protocol, and two examples in patients with Kawasaki disease

Pharmacologic stress cardiovascular magnetic resonance (PSCMR) is a well-established and reliable diagnostic tool for evaluation of coronary artery disease in the adult population. Stress imaging overall and PSCMR in particular is less utilized in the pediatric population with limited reported data. In this review, we highlight the potential use of PSCMR in specific pediatric cohorts with congenital and acquired heart disease, and we review the reported experience. A suggested protocol is presented in addition to two case examples of patients with Kawasaki disease where PSCMR aided decision making.