Quantitative Late Gadolinium Enhancement Cardiac Magnetic Resonance and Sudden Death in Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy: A Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Quantitative late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) cardiac magnetic resonance provides important prognostic information for sudden cardiac death (SCD) in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM). However, it has not been fully integrated into clinical practice. OBJECTIVES: To assess the prognostic value of LGE extent in predicting SCD in adults with HCM across different methods of quantification, thresholds, and patients' clinical profile. METHODS: The authors searched PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library for studies investigating the prognostic value of LGE% in predicting SCD in HCM. Pooled odds ratios were calculated with 95% CIs. The optimal threshold was determined using a multiple cutoffs model. RESULTS: Eleven studies were included in the meta-analysis with a total of 5,550 patients and a median follow-up time of 5.2 years. Two studies quantified LGE manually, 7 studies used the 6 SD technique, 1 study used the 4 SD technique, and 1 study the 2 SD technique. There was no statistically significant difference in predicting SCD between these 4 methods (P = 0.443). Optimal cutoff could be determined only for the 6 SD technique. LGE 10% was the optimal threshold of the 6 SD technique with sensitivity 0.73 and specificity 0.67. CONCLUSIONS: The different LGE quantification techniques have comparable accuracy in predicting SCD. When the more extensively studied 6 SD technique is used, LGE 10% is the optimal cutoff and can effectively restratify intermediate-risk patients. LGE extent can improve HCM risk stratification, but it is unlikely to become a standalone tool.

Prognostic value of cardiovascular magnetic resonance T1 mapping techniques in non-ischemic dilated cardiomyopathy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular magnetic resonance T1 mapping is a non-invasive tool for quantifying tissue alterations in the myocardium. Its prognostic value in non-ischemic dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to synthetize available data and explore the prognostic value of T1 mapping in DCM. METHODS: We searched Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Library and Scopus for cohort studies up to 28 March 2020 that reported prognostic data for cardiovascular magnetic resonance T1 mapping in patients with DCM. Hazard ratios (HRs) were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis. Values were expressed as standard deviation (SD) of normal controls. Heterogeneity was assessed with the I2 statistic. RESULTS: Eight studies were included in the meta-analysis, with a total of 1242 patients. Extracellular volume fraction (ECV) had high prognostic value for a composite outcome of mortality and morbidity with HR 1.38 (95% confidence interval, 1.18-1.61). Native T1 was also shown to have high prognostic value for a composite outcome of mortality and morbidity with HR 1.20 (95% confidence interval, 1.14-1.27). Heterogeneity was moderate for the ECV analysis (I2 = 64%). CONCLUSIONS: ECV and native T1 could potentially be used to improve risk stratification in DCM. Future studies should investigate the prognostic value of T1 mapping by separating mortality and morbidity as primary outcomes and evaluate its incremental value in addition to standard risk stratification criteria.

Data on diagnostic performance of stress perfusion cardiac magnetic resonance for coronary artery disease detection at the vessel level.

Stress perfusion cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) has been proposed as an important gatekeeper for invasive coronary angiography (ICA) and percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) in patients evaluated for possible coronary artery disease (CAD) (Fihn et al., 2012; Montalescot et al., 2013) [1], [2]. Several meta-analyses have evaluated the accuracy of stress perfusion CMR to diagnose CAD at the vessel level (Danad et al., 2017; Dai et al., 2016; Jiang et al., 2016; Takx et al., 2015; Li et al., 2015; Desai and Jha, 2013; Jaarsma et al. 2012; Hamon et al., 2010; Nandalur et al. 2007) [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11]. However, they included in the same analysis studies with different definitions of significant CAD (i.e. fractional flow reserve [FFR] < 0.75 and < 0.80 or coronary stenosis ≥ 50% and ≥ 70%), magnetic field strength (1.5 or 3 Tesla [T]), and study protocol (integration or not of late gadolinium enhancement [LGE] into stress perfusion protocol). Data of 34 studies (6091 arteries) have been pooled with the aim of analyzing the accuracy of stress perfusion CMR for the diagnosis of ischemic heart disease at the vessel level according to different definitions of significant CAD, magnetic field strength and study protocol (Arnold et al., 2010; Bettencourt et al., 2013; Cheng et al., 2007; Chiribiri et al., 2013; Cury et al., 2006; De Mello et al., 2012; Donati et al., 2010; Ebersberger et al., 2013; Gebker et al., 2008; Greulich et al., 2015; Hussain et al., 2016; Ishida et al., 2005, 2003; Kamiya et al., 2014; Kitagawa et al., 2008; Klein et al., 2008; Klem et al., 2006; Klumpp et al., 2010; Krittayaphong et al., 2009; Lockie et al., 2011; Ma et al., 2012; Merkle et al., 2007; Meyer et al., 2008; Mor-Avi et al., 2008; Pan et al., 2015; Papanastasiou et al., 2016; Pons Lladó et al., 2004; Sakuma et al., 2005; Salerno et al., 2014; Scheffel et al., 2010; van Werkhoven et al., 2010; Walcher et al., 2013; Watkins et al., 2009; Yun et al., 2015) [12-45]. This article describes data related article titled "Diagnostic Performance of Stress Perfusion Cardiac Magnetic Resonance for the Detection of Coronary Artery Disease" (Kiaos et al., submitted for publication) [46].

Diagnostic performance of stress perfusion cardiac magnetic resonance for the detection of coronary artery disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to investigate the accuracy of qualitative stress perfusion cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) to diagnose ischemia-causing lesions according to different definitions of significant coronary artery disease (CAD), and magnetic field strength. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library for studies evaluating diagnostic performance of qualitative stress perfusion CMR for diagnosis of CAD versus coronary angiography or fractional flow reserve (FFR) from inception to 10 September 2017. We used hierarchical models to synthesize the available data. RESULTS: Sixty-seven studies (7113 patients) met the inclusion criteria. The patient-based analysis of studies using FFR as the reference standard demonstrated a mean sensitivity of 0.90 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85-0.93) and a mean specificity of 0.85 (95% CI, 0.80-0.89). The patient-based analyses for detecting coronary stenosis ≥50% and coronary stenosis ≥70% at 1.5T and for detecting coronary stenosis ≥50% and coronary stenosis ≥70%, at 3T, demonstrated a mean sensitivity of 0.82 (95% CI, 0.79-0.84), 0.86 (95% CI, 0.83-0.89), 0.90 (95% CI, 0.82-0.95), and 0.91 (95% CI, 0.79-0.96), respectively; with a mean specificity of 0.75 (95% CI, 0.71-0.80), 0.77 (95% CI, 0.71-0.81), 0.79 (95% CI, 0.69-0.86), and 0.74 (95% CI, 0.59-0.85). CONCLUSION: Qualitative stress perfusion CMR has high accuracy for the diagnosis of CAD, irrespective of the reference standard and the magnet strength. Studies using FFR as the reference standard had higher diagnostic accuracy on a patient level compared to studies using coronary angiography, with a notable difference in specificity.