Prognostic Implications of Global Longitudinal Strain by Feature-Tracking Cardiac Magnetic Resonance in ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction.

BACKGROUND The high accuracy of feature-tracking cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging qualifies this novel modality as potential gold standard for myocardial strain analyses in ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients; however, the incremental prognostic validity of feature-tracking-CMR over left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and myocardial damage remains unclear. This study therefore aimed to determine the value of myocardial strain measured by feature-tracking-CMR for the prediction of clinical outcome following ST-elevation myocardial infarction. METHODS This prospective observational study enrolled 451 revascularized ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients. Comprehensive CMR investigations were performed 3 (interquartile range, 2-4) days after infarction to determine LVEF, global longitudinal strain (GLS), global radial strain, and global circumferential strain as well as myocardial damage. Primary end point was a composite of death, re-infarction, and congestive heart failure (major adverse cardiac events [MACE]). RESULTS During a follow-up of 24 (interquartile range, 11-48) months, 46 patients (10%) experienced a MACE event. All 3 strain indices were impaired in patients with MACE (all P<0.001). However, GLS emerged as the strongest MACE prognosticator among strain parameters (area under the curve, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.69-0.77]) and was significantly better (P=0.005) than LVEF (area under the curve, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.59-0.68]). The association between GLS and MACE remained significant (P<0.001) after adjustment for global radial strain, global circumferential strain, and LVEF as well as for infarct size and microvascular obstruction. The addition of GLS to a risk model comprising LVEF, infarct size, and microvascular obstruction led to a net reclassification improvement (0.35 [95% CI, 0.14-0.55]; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS GLS by feature-tracking-CMR strongly and independently predicted the occurrence of medium-term MACE in contemporary revascularized ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients. Importantly, the prognostic value of GLS was superior and incremental to LVEF and CMR markers of infarct severity.

[1]  Hans Torp,et al.  Myocardial strain imaging: how useful is it in clinical decision making? , 2015, European heart journal.

[2]  G. Stone,et al.  The prognostic importance of left ventricular function in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: the HORIZONS-AMI trial , 2014, European heart journal. Acute cardiovascular care.

[3]  H. Thiele,et al.  Intramyocardial haemorrhage and prognosis after ST-elevation myocardial infarction , 2018, European heart journal cardiovascular Imaging.

[4]  P. Beerbaum,et al.  Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Myocardial Feature Tracking: Concepts and Clinical Applications , 2016, Circulation. Cardiovascular imaging.

[5]  A. Mayr,et al.  Association of copeptin with myocardial infarct size and myocardial function after ST segment elevation myocardial infarction , 2013, Heart.

[6]  Grant T. Harris,et al.  Comparing Effect Sizes in Follow-Up Studies: ROC Area, Cohen's d, and r , 2005, Law and human behavior.

[7]  H. Thiele,et al.  The challenges and impact of microvascular injury in ST-elevation myocardial infarction , 2016, Expert review of cardiovascular therapy.

[8]  N. Sattar,et al.  Prognostic significance of infarct core pathology revealed by quantitative non-contrast in comparison with contrast cardiac magnetic resonance imaging in reperfused ST-elevation myocardial infarction survivors , 2015, European heart journal.

[9]  J. Kirkpatrick,et al.  Echocardiography in heart failure: applications, utility, and new horizons. , 2007, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[10]  A. Evangelista,et al.  Prognostic Value of Strain by Tissue Tracking Cardiac Magnetic Resonance After ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction. , 2017, JACC. Cardiovascular imaging.

[11]  M. Robson,et al.  CMR Native T1 Mapping Allows Differentiation of Reversible Versus Irreversible Myocardial Damage in ST-segment–Elevation Myocardial Infarction , 2017, Circulation. Cardiovascular imaging.

[12]  Kevin A Hallgren,et al.  Computing Inter-Rater Reliability for Observational Data: An Overview and Tutorial. , 2012, Tutorials in quantitative methods for psychology.

[13]  Jeroen J. Bax,et al.  Effect of Early Metoprolol During ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction on Left Ventricular Strain: Feature-Tracking Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Substudy From the METOCARD-CNIC trial. , 2019, JACC. Cardiovascular imaging.

[14]  Douglas Weaver,et al.  Third universal definition of myocardial infarction. , 2012, Circulation.

[15]  T. Friede,et al.  Impact of treatment delay on mortality in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients presenting with and without haemodynamic instability: results from the German prospective, multicentre FITT-STEMI trial , 2018, European heart journal.

[16]  S. Plein,et al.  The role of left ventricular deformation in the assessment of microvascular obstruction and intramyocardial haemorrhage , 2016, The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging.

[17]  Peter Søgaard,et al.  Prediction of all-cause mortality and heart failure admissions from global left ventricular longitudinal strain in patients with acute myocardial infarction and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction. , 2013, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[18]  C. Held,et al.  Improved outcomes in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction during the last 20 years are related to implementation of evidence-based treatments: experiences from the SWEDEHEART registry 1995–2014 , 2017, European heart journal.

[19]  J. Lowe,et al.  The Wavefront Phenomenon of Ischemic Cell Death: 1. Myocardial Infarct Size vs Duration of Coronary Occlusion in Dogs , 1977, Circulation.

[20]  H. Thiele,et al.  Impact of Atrial Fibrillation During ST-Segment–Elevation Myocardial Infarction on Infarct Characteristics and Prognosis , 2018, Circulation. Cardiovascular imaging.

[21]  Holger Thiele,et al.  Comprehensive prognosis assessment by CMR imaging after ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. , 2014, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[22]  R. Kim,et al.  T2-weighted imaging to assess post-infarct myocardium at risk. , 2011, JACC. Cardiovascular imaging.

[23]  R. O’Brien,et al.  A Caution Regarding Rules of Thumb for Variance Inflation Factors , 2007 .

[24]  A. Mayr,et al.  Relation of Low‐Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol With Microvascular Injury and Clinical Outcome in Revascularized ST‐Elevation Myocardial Infarction , 2017, Journal of the American Heart Association.

[25]  H. Thiele,et al.  Risk stratification by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging after ST-elevation myocardial infarction , 2015, Current opinion in cardiology.

[26]  Jane A. Linderbaum,et al.  2013 ACCF/AHA guideline for the management of ST-elevation myocardial infarction: executive summary: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. , 2013, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[27]  A. Mayr,et al.  Fibroblast growth factor 23 as novel biomarker for early risk stratification after ST-elevation myocardial infarction , 2016, Heart.

[28]  R. Kim,et al.  Relationship of T2-Weighted MRI Myocardial Hyperintensity and the Ischemic Area-At-Risk , 2015, Circulation research.

[29]  R. Kim,et al.  Association of Feature-Tracking Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging Left Ventricular Global Longitudinal Strain With All-Cause Mortality in Patients With Reduced Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction. , 2017, Circulation.

[30]  Jeroen J. Bax,et al.  Third universal definition of myocardial infarction , 2013, Nature Reviews Cardiology.

[31]  H. Thiele,et al.  Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Myocardial Feature Tracking for Optimized Prediction of Cardiovascular Events Following Myocardial Infarction. , 2018, JACC. Cardiovascular imaging.

[32]  E. DeLong,et al.  Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach. , 1988, Biometrics.

[33]  D J Pennell,et al.  Comparison of left ventricular ejection fraction and volumes in heart failure by echocardiography, radionuclide ventriculography and cardiovascular magnetic resonance; are they interchangeable? , 2000, European heart journal.

[34]  W. Youden,et al.  Index for rating diagnostic tests , 1950, Cancer.