Evaluation of the effectiveness and prognostic significance of the use of CMR in determining the viability of the myocardium

Aim: to evaluate the effectiveness of the cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) method with delayed contrast for the diagnosis of viable dysfunctional myocardium.

Materials and methods. А total of 148 patients participated in the analysis of the study. Inclusion criteria: myocardial infarction in past medical history; myocardial ischemia according to stress tests; occlusion or subtotal stenosis of one or more coronary arteries according to digital angiography (SYNTAX score < 32); viable myocardium in the zone of the occluded/stenotic artery; heart failure of I–III functional class (NYHA); left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of less than 50%. Patients were randomized into 2 equivalent groups: in group I, myocardial viability was determined by CMR with delayed contrast, in group II, by stress-echocardiography with dobutamine. All patients underwent stenting of the coronary arteries in the zone of the viable myocardium with drug-eluting stents. Long-term results of treatment were followed 18 months after endovascular intervention in all patients.

Results. CMR method with delayed contrasting allows to reliably estimate the existing violations of local contractility in the area of the hibernated myocardium. In patients from group I, it was possible to determine the mass fraction (volume) of the ischemic viable myocardium, which was not possible for patients from group II. Thus, the average indices of the volume of ischemic myocardium were (32.8 ± 2.4)%. All patients had a significant improvement in the local contractility of the myocardium after performed endovascular myocardial revascularization. After 18 months, a significant decrease in the mass fraction of ischemic viable myocardium in the peri-infarction zone was noted among patients from group I, compared with preoperative data ((32.8 ± 2.4) and (20.7 ± 3.1)%, respectively, p < 0.05). Thus, in group I the volume of ischemic myocardium decreased by 37%. In all studied groups, there was a significant increase in LVEF, compared with data obtained when the patient was discharged from the hospital. Survival in group I was 100%, whereas in group II it was 97.3% (p > 0.05). The incidence of non-fatal MI was 1.4 and 8.1% in groups I and II, respectively (p < 0.05).

1. Kwon D.H., Hachamocitch R., Popovic Z.B. et al. Survival in patients with severe ischemic cardiomyopathy undergoing revascularization versus medical therapy: association with end-systolic volume and viability. Circulation. 2012; (126): 3–8.

2. Vorozhtsova I.N., Bukhovets I.L., Bezlyak V.V. i dr. Comparison of the results of stress echocardiography and myocardial scintigraphy with 99m-technetril and a sample with sublingual nitroglycerin intake in assessing the viability of the myocardium in patients with postinfarction cardiosclerosis. Patologiya krovoobrashcheniya i kardiokhirurgiya. 2001; (3): 15–20 (in Russ.).

3. Nagel E., Schuster A. Shortening without contraction: new insights into hibernating myocardium. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. Img. 2010; (3): 731–733.

4. Alekhin M.N., Bozhev A.M., Morozova Yu.A. et. al. Stress echocardiography with dobutamine in the diagnosis of viability in patients with myocardial revascularization. Kardiologiya. 2000; (12): 44–49 (in Russ.).

5. Ling L.H., Marvick T.H., Flores D.R. et al. Identification of therapeutic benefit from revascularization in patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction: inducible ischemia versus hibernating myocardium. Circ. Cardiovasc. Imaging. 2013; (6): 363–372.

6. Hickman M., Chelliah R., Burden L., Senior R. Resting myocardial blood flow, coronary flow reserve, and contractile reserve in hibernating myocardium: implications for using resting myocardial contrast echocardiography vs. dobutamine echocardiography for the detection of hibernating myocardium. Eur. J. Echocardiogr. 2010; 11 (9): 756–762.

7. Trufanov G.E., Rud’ S.D., Zheleznyak S.E. MRI in the diagnosis of coronary heart disease: training aid. St.Petersburg: Izd-vo «ELBI-SPb» Publ., 2012: 63 (in Russ.).

8. Kokov A.N., Masenko V.L., Semenov S.E., Barbarash O.L MRI of the heart in the evaluation of postinfarction changes and its role in determining the tactics of myocardial revascularization. Complex problems of cardiovascular diseases. Kompleksnye problemy serdechno-sosudistykh zabolevanii. 2014; (3): 97–102 (in Russ.).

9. Pennell D.J. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance. Circulation. 2010; (121): 692–705.

10. West A.M., Kramer C.M. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging of myocardial infarction, viability and cardiomyopathies. Curr. Probl. Cardiol. 2010; (35): 176–220.

11. Windecker S., Kolh P., Alfonso F. et al. 2014 ESC/ EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization. Eur. Heart. J. 2014; (35): 2541–2619.

12. Wellnhofer E., Olariu A., Klein C. Magnetic resonance low-dose dobutamine test is superior to SCAR quantifi cation for the prediction of functional recovery. Circulation. 2004; 109 (18): 2172–2174.

13. Romero J., Xue X., Gonzales W. et al. CMR imaging assessing viability in patients with chronic ventricular dysfunction due to coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis of prospective. JACC Cardiovasc. Imaging. 2012; 5 (5): 494–508.