Diagnostic Utility of the Simplified Perfusion Fraction for Identifying Myocardial Injury in Patients With Reperfused ST ‐segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction

Dong‐Aolei An,Bing‐Hua Chen,Jie He,Shi‐Teng Suo,Lara M. Fahmy,Tong‐Tong Han,Jiani Hu,Jian‐Rong Xu,Lian‐Ming Wu,Jun Pu
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.27310
IF: 4.4
2020-08-25
Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Abstract:<section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Background</h3><p>Acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is a disease with high morbidity and mortality worldwide and the evaluation of myocardial injury and perfusion status following myocardial ischemia and reperfusion is of clinical value.</p></section><section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Purpose</h3><p>To assess the diagnostic utility of simplified perfusion fraction (SPF) in differentiating salvage and infarcted myocardium and its predictive value for left ventricular remodeling in patients with reperfusion ST‐segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).</p></section><section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Study Type</h3><p>Prospective.</p></section><section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Population</h3><p>Forty‐one reperfused STEMI patients and 20 healthy volunteers.</p></section><section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Field Strength/Sequence</h3><p>3.0T MRI. The MR examination included cine, T<sub>2</sub>‐short tau inversion recovery (T<sub>2</sub>‐STIR), first pass perfusiong (FPP),phase sensitive inversion recovery (PSIR), and diffusion‐weighted imaging (DWI). </p></section><section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Assessment</h3><p>SPF values among different myocardium regions (infarcted, salvaged, remote, and MVO) and stages of reperfused STEMI patients as well as normal controls were measured. The diagnostic utility of SPF values in differentiating salvaged and infarcted myocardium was assessed.</p></section><section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Statistical Analysis</h3><p>Independent <i>t</i>‐test and the Mann–Whitney <i>U‐</i>test. Logistic regression. </p></section><section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Results</h3><p>SPF values in healthy controls were not significantly different than SPF values in the remote myocardium of patients (40.09 ± 1.47% vs. 40.28 ± 1.93%, <i>P</i> = 0.698). In reperfusion STEMI patients, SPF values were lower in infarcted myocardium compared to remote and salvaged myocardium (32.15 ± 2.36% vs. 40.28 ± 1.93%, <i>P</i> &lt; 0.001; 32.15 ± 2.36% vs. 36.68 ± 2.71%, <i>P</i> &lt; 0.001). SPF values of infarcted myocardium showed a rebound increase from acute to convalescent stages (32.15 ± 2.36% vs. 34.69 ± 3.69%, <i>P</i> &lt; 0.001). When differentiating infarcted and salvaged myocardium, SPF values demonstrated an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.89 (sensitivity 85.4%, specificity 80.5%, cutoff 34.42%). Lower SPF values were associated with lower odds ratio (OR = 0.304) of left ventricular remodeling after adjusting for potential confounders with a confidence interval (CI) of 0.129–0.717, <i>P</i> = 0.007. </p></section><section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Data Conclusion</h3><p>SPF might be able to differentiate salvaged and infarcted myocardium and is a strong predictor of left ventricular remodeling in reperfused STEMI patients.</p></section><section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Level of Evidence</h3><p>2</p></section><section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Technical Efficacy Stage</h3><p>2</p></section>
radiology, nuclear medicine & medical imaging
What problem does this paper attempt to address?