Cardiovascular magnetic resonance accurately detects obstructive coronary artery disease in suspected non-ST elevation myocardial infarction: a sub-analysis of the CARMENTA Trial.

BACKGROUND: Invasive coronary angiography (ICA) is still the reference test in suspected non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), although a substantial number of patients do not have obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD). Early cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) may be a useful gatekeeper for ICA in this setting. The main objective was to investigate the accuracy of CMR to detect obstructive CAD in NSTEMI. METHODS: This study is a sub-analysis of a randomized controlled trial investigating whether a non-invasive imaging-first strategy safely reduced the number of ICA compared to routine clinical care in suspected NSTEMI (acute chest pain, non-diagnostic electrocardiogram, high sensitivity troponin T > 14 ng/L), and included 51 patients who underwent CMR prior to ICA. A stepwise approach was used to assess the diagnostic accuracy of CMR to detect (1) obstructive CAD (diameter stenosis ≥ 70% by ICA) and (2) an adjudicated final diagnosis of acute coronary syndrome (ACS). First, in all patients the combination of cine, T2-weighted and late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) imaging was evaluated for the presence of abnormalities consistent with a coronary etiology in any sequence. Hereafter and only when the scan was normal or equivocal, adenosine stress-perfusion CMR was added. RESULTS: Of 51 patients included (63 ± 10 years, 51% male), 34 (67%) had obstructive CAD by ICA. The sensitivity, specificity and overall accuracy of the first step to diagnose obstructive CAD were 79%, 71% and 77%, respectively. Additional vasodilator stress-perfusion CMR was performed in 19 patients and combined with step one resulted in an overall sensitivity of 97%, specificity of 65% and accuracy of 86%. Of the remaining 17 patients with non-obstructive CAD, 4 (24%) had evidence for a myocardial infarction on LGE, explaining the modest specificity. The sensitivity, specificity and overall accuracy to diagnose ACS (n = 43) were 88%, 88% and 88%, respectively. CONCLUSION: CMR accurately detects obstructive CAD and ACS in suspected NSTEMI. Non-obstructive CAD is common with CMR still identifying an infarction in almost one-quarter of patients. CMR should be considered as an early diagnostic approach in suspected NSTEMI. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The CARMENTA trial has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov with identifier NCT01559467.

Long-term outcome after deferred revascularization due to negative fractional flow reserve in intermediate coronary lesions.

OBJECTIVES: The aim was to assess long-term outcome after deferring intervention of coronary lesions with a fractional flow reserve (FFR) value of >0.80 in a real-world patient population and then to identify factors associated with deferred target lesion failure (DTLF). BACKGROUND: Deferring coronary interventions of intermediate lesions based on FFR measurement is safe, irrespective of the extent of coronary artery disease. However, FFR values near the cut-off of >0.80 may have less favorable outcome. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed in patients with deferred coronary intervention based on FFR value >0.80. The primary endpoint was DTLF, a composite of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and any coronary revascularization, related to the initially deferred stenosis. RESULTS: A total of 600 patients, mean age of 66 ± 10 years, and 751 coronary lesions with negative FFR values (mean 0.88 ± 0.04) were included. The mean follow-up was 27 ± 15 months. DTLF occurred in 44 patients (7.3%), revascularization in 42 (7%), and ACS without revascularization in 2 patients (0.3%). Patients with DTLF more often had diabetes mellitus, previous coronary artery bypass grafting, multivessel disease (MVD), and lower FFR at inclusion. Multivariable regression analysis showed that lower deferred FFR values [FFR 0.81-0.85: hazard ratio (HR) 2.79 (95% CI [confidence interval]; 1.46-5.32), p .002], MVD [HR 1.98 (95% CI; 1.05-3.75), p .036], distal lesions [HR 2.43 (95% CI; 1.29-4.57), p .006], and lesions located in a saphenous vein graft (SVG) [HR 6.35 (95% CI; 1.81-22.28), p .004] were independent predictors for DTLF. CONCLUSIONS: The long-term rate of DTLF of initially deferred coronary lesions was 7.3%. Independent predictors for DTLF are lower deferred FFR value, the presence of MVD, distal lesions, and lesions in SVG.

Initial Imaging-Guided Strategy Versus Routine Care in Patients With Non-ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction.

BACKGROUND: Patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and elevated high-sensitivity cardiac troponin levels often routinely undergo invasive coronary angiography (ICA), but many do not have obstructive coronary artery disease. OBJECTIVES: This study investigated whether cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) or computed tomographic angiography (CTA) may serve as a safe gatekeeper for ICA. METHODS: This randomized controlled trial (NCT01559467) in 207 patients (age 64 years; 62% male patients) with acute chest pain, elevated high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T levels (>14 ng/l), and inconclusive electrocardiogram compared a CMR- or CTA-first strategy with a control strategy of routine clinical care. Follow-up ICA was recommended when initial CMR or CTA suggested myocardial ischemia, infarction, or obstructive coronary artery disease (≥70% stenosis). Primary efficacy and secondary safety endpoints were referral to ICA during hospitalization and 1-year outcomes (major adverse cardiac events and complications), respectively. RESULTS: The CMR- and CTA-first strategies reduced ICA compared with routine clinical care (87% [p = 0.001], 66% [p < 0.001], and 100%, respectively), with similar outcome (hazard ratio: CMR vs. routine, 0.78 [95% confidence interval: 0.37 to 1.61]; CTA vs. routine, 0.66 [95% confidence interval: 0.31 to 1.42]; and CMR vs. CTA, 1.19 [95% confidence interval: 0.53 to 2.66]). Obstructive coronary artery disease after ICA was found in 61% of patients in the routine clinical care arm, in 69% in the CMR-first arm (p = 0.308 vs. routine), and in 85% in the CTA-first arm (p = 0.006 vs. routine). In the non-CMR and non-CTA arms, follow-up CMR and CTA were performed in 67% and 13% of patients and led to a new diagnosis in 33% and 3%, respectively (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: A novel strategy of implementing CMR or CTA first in the diagnostic process in non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction is a safe gatekeeper for ICA.