International journal of cardiology · 2017
Late gadolinium enhancement as a predictor of functional recovery, need for defibrillator implantation and prognosis in non-ischemic dilated cardiomyopathy.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Barison Andrea, Aimo Alberto, Ortalda Alessandro, Todiere Giancarlo, Grigoratos Chrysanthos, Passino Claudio, Camici Paolo G, Aquaro Giovanni D, Emdin Michele
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Aim of the study was to investigate whether late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) at cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) predict reverse remodeling (RR) in non-ischemic dilated cardiomyopathy (NIDCM).
METHODS: Seventy-one NIDCM patients (age 57±14years, 43 males, median left ventricular ejection fraction [LVEF] 35%, [interquartile range 27-41%]) with two CMR scans within 5years were included. RR was defined as ≥10% reduction in left ventricular (LV) end-diastolic volume and ≥10% LVEF increase. The end-point was a composite of all-cause death, cardiovascular hospitalization or appropriate defibrillator discharge. LGE was assessed both visually and as percentage of LV mass (LGE%).
RESULTS: LGE was present in 42 patients (59%). During the interval between the 2 CMR scans (median 28 [15-44]months), 22 patients (31%) displayed RR. LGE absence predicted RR irrespectively of baseline LV volumes and LVEF. Over a median 42[15-73]-month follow-up, the endpoint occurred in 36 patients (51%). LGE absence was associated with better prognosis (P=0.043), with best quantitative LGE cut-point <7% at ROC analysis (P=0.017), but RR was the strongest prognostic predictor. Among 35 patients with baseline LVEF <35%, 25 (69%) crossed the 35% LVEF threshold. Both LGE absence and quantitative LGE <7% were associated with crossing of the 35% LVEF threshold for defibrillator implantation; patients with either LGE or quantitative LGE≥7% had a worse prognosis.
CONCLUSIONS: In NIDCM, the absence of LGE at baseline CMR is associated with RR. When baseline LVEF is <35%, LGE absence is associated with more frequent crossing of the 35% LVEF threshold for defibrillator implantation.
METHODS: Seventy-one NIDCM patients (age 57±14years, 43 males, median left ventricular ejection fraction [LVEF] 35%, [interquartile range 27-41%]) with two CMR scans within 5years were included. RR was defined as ≥10% reduction in left ventricular (LV) end-diastolic volume and ≥10% LVEF increase. The end-point was a composite of all-cause death, cardiovascular hospitalization or appropriate defibrillator discharge. LGE was assessed both visually and as percentage of LV mass (LGE%).
RESULTS: LGE was present in 42 patients (59%). During the interval between the 2 CMR scans (median 28 [15-44]months), 22 patients (31%) displayed RR. LGE absence predicted RR irrespectively of baseline LV volumes and LVEF. Over a median 42[15-73]-month follow-up, the endpoint occurred in 36 patients (51%). LGE absence was associated with better prognosis (P=0.043), with best quantitative LGE cut-point <7% at ROC analysis (P=0.017), but RR was the strongest prognostic predictor. Among 35 patients with baseline LVEF <35%, 25 (69%) crossed the 35% LVEF threshold. Both LGE absence and quantitative LGE <7% were associated with crossing of the 35% LVEF threshold for defibrillator implantation; patients with either LGE or quantitative LGE≥7% had a worse prognosis.
CONCLUSIONS: In NIDCM, the absence of LGE at baseline CMR is associated with RR. When baseline LVEF is <35%, LGE absence is associated with more frequent crossing of the 35% LVEF threshold for defibrillator implantation.