Arrhythmic Risk Stratification by Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Patients With Nonischemic Cardiomyopathy

Daniel J Hammersley,Abbasin Zegard,Emmanuel Androulakis,Richard E Jones,Osita Okafor,Suzan Hatipoglu,Lukas Mach,Amrit S Lota,Zohya Khalique,Antonio de Marvao,Ankur Gulati,Resham Baruah,Kaushik Guha,James S Ware,Upasana Tayal,Dudley J Pennell,Brian P Halliday,Tian Qiu,Sanjay K Prasad,Francisco Leyva
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2024.06.046
2024-08-29
Abstract:Background: Myocardial fibrosis (MF) forms part of the arrhythmic substrate for ventricular arrhythmias (VAs). Objectives: This study sought to determine whether total myocardial fibrosis (TF) and gray zone fibrosis (GZF), assessed using cardiovascular magnetic resonance, are better than left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in predicting ventricular arrhythmias in patients with nonischemic cardiomyopathy (NICM). Methods: Patients with NICM in a derivation cohort (n = 866) and a validation cohort (n = 848) underwent quantification of TF and GZF. The primary composite endpoint was sudden cardiac death or VAs (ventricular fibrillation or ventricular tachycardia). Results: The primary endpoint was met by 52 of 866 (6.0%) patients in the derivation cohort (median follow-up: 7.5 years; Q1-Q3: 5.2-9.3 years). In competing-risks analyses, MF on visual assessment (MFVA) predicted the primary endpoint (HR: 5.83; 95% CI: 3.15-10.8). Quantified MF measures permitted categorization into 3 risk groups: a TF of >0 g and ≤10 g was associated with an intermediate risk (HR: 4.03; 95% CI: 1.99-8.16), and a TF of >10 g was associated with the highest risk (HR: 9.17; 95% CI: 4.64-18.1) compared to patients with no MFVA (lowest risk). Similar trends were observed in the validation cohort. Categorization into these 3 risk groups was achievable using TF or GZF in combination or in isolation. In contrast, LVEF of <35% was a poor predictor of the primary endpoint (validation cohort HR: 1.99; 95% CI: 0.99-4.01). Conclusions: MFVA is a strong predictor of sudden cardiac death and VAs in NICM. TF and GZF mass added incremental value to MFVA. In contrast, LVEF was a poor discriminator of arrhythmic risk.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?