Prognostic value of cardiovascular magnetic resonance left ventricular volumetry and geometry in patients receiving an implantable cardioverter defibrillator.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Current indications for implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) implantation for sudden cardiac death prevention rely primarily on left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (LVEF). Currently, two different contouring methods by cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) are used for LVEF calculation. We evaluated the comparative prognostic value of these two methods in the ICD population, and if measures of LV geometry added predictive value. METHODS: In this retrospective, 2-center observational cohort study, patients underwent CMR prior to ICD implantation for primary or secondary prevention from January 2005 to December 2018. Two readers, blinded to all clinical and outcome data assessed CMR studies by (a) including the LV trabeculae and papillary muscles (TPM) (trabeculated endocardial contours), and (b) excluding LV TPM (rounded endocardial contours) from the total LV mass for calculation of LVEF, LV volumes and mass. LV sphericity and sphere-volume indices were also calculated. The primary outcome was a composite of appropriate ICD shocks or death. RESULTS: Of the 372 consecutive eligible patients, 129 patients (34.7%) had appropriate ICD shock, and 65 (17.5%) died over a median duration follow-up of 61 months (IQR 38-103). LVEF was higher when including TPM versus excluding TPM (36% vs. 31%, p < 0.001). The rate of appropriate ICD shock or all-cause death was higher among patients with lower LVEF both including and excluding TPM (p for trend = 0.019 and 0.004, respectively). In multivariable models adjusting for age, primary prevention, ischemic heart disease and late gadolinium enhancement, both LVEF (HR per 10% including TPM 0.814 [95%CI 0.688-0.962] p = 0.016, vs. HR per 10% excluding TPM 0.780 [95%CI 0.639-0.951] p = 0.014) and LV mass index (HR per 10 g/m2 including TPM 1.099 [95%CI 1.027-1.175] p = 0.006; HR per 10 g/m2 excluding TPM 1.126 [95%CI 1.032-1.228] p = 0.008) had independent prognostic value. Higher LV end-systolic volumes and LV sphericity were significantly associated with increased mortality but showed no added prognostic value. CONCLUSION: Both CMR post-processing methods showed similar prognostic value and can be used for LVEF assessment. LVEF and indexed LV mass are independent predictors for appropriate ICD shocks and all-cause mortality in the ICD population.