Copyright
©The Author(s) 2017.
World J Cardiol. Feb 26, 2017; 9(2): 109-133
Published online Feb 26, 2017. doi: 10.4330/wjc.v9.i2.109
Published online Feb 26, 2017. doi: 10.4330/wjc.v9.i2.109
Ref. | Year | n | LGE method | Main findings | Time of prognostic CMR post STEMI | Follow-up |
Regenfus et al[117] | 2015 | 249 | Manual | L-MVO extent strongest IP for MACE in model including IS, LVEF, TIMI pre and post PPCI and no. diseased vessels | 3.7 d | 72 mo |
Eitel et al[119] | 2014 | 738 | > 5SD | Largest multicentre study of L-MVO in PPCI. L-MVO > 1.4% LVM and TIMI risk score only IPs of combined MACE. Adding L-MVO to model with clinical predictors, LVEF and IS increased c-statistic | 7 d | 6 mo |
de Waha et al[120] | 2012 | 438 | Manual | L-MVO extent IP for combined MACE in model including IS, LV volumes (only other IP was LVEF). L-MVO/IS strongest IP in model including L-MVO extent, LVEF, IS, LV volumes | 3 d | 19 mo |
de Waha et al[36] | 2010 | 438 | Manual | Presence and extent of L-MVO were strongest IPs for MACE and mortality in models with IS, LVEF, ST-res, TIMI-flow post PCI. E-MVO was not an IP | 3 d | 19 mo |
Cochet et al[37] | 2009 | 184 | Manual | L-MVO strongest IP for MACE, in models including GRACE score, IS, LVEF. L-MVO stronger IP than E-MVO (OR 8.7 vs 2.5) | “3-7 d” | 12 mo |
Bruder et al[116] | 2008 | 143 | Manual | Only extent of L-MVO > 0.5% LV mass was IP for MACE; model included IS, LVEF, age, DM, sex | 4.5 d | 12 mo |
Hombach et al[6] | 2005 | 110 | Manual | L-MVO IP for MACE (P = 0.04) in model including LV end-diastolic volume and LVEF | 6 d | 268 d |
- Citation: Khan JN, McCann GP. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging assessment of outcomes in acute myocardial infarction. World J Cardiol 2017; 9(2): 109-133
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1949-8462/full/v9/i2/109.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4330/wjc.v9.i2.109