Cardiac magnetic resonance stress perfusion imaging for evaluation of patients with chest pain

Background: Stress cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) has demonstrated excellent diagnostic and prognostic value in single-center studies. Objectives: This study sought to investigate the prognostic value of stress CMR and downstream costs from subsequent cardiac testing in a retrospective multicenter study in the United States. Methods: In this retrospective study, consecutive patients from 13 centers across 11 states who presented with a chest pain syndrome and were referred for stress CMR were followed for a target period of 4 years. The authors associated CMR findings with a primary outcome of cardiovascular death or nonfatal myocardial infarction using competing risk-adjusted regression models and downstream costs of ischemia testing using published Medicare national payment rates. Results: In this study, 2,349 patients (63 ± 11 years of age, 47% female) were followed for a median of 5.4 years. Patients with no ischemia or late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) by CMR, observed in 1,583 patients (67%), experienced low annualized rates of primary outcome (4-fold higher annual primary outcome rate and a >10-fold higher rate of coronary revascularization during the first year after CMR. Patients with ischemia and LGE both negative had low average annual cost spent on ischemia testing across all years of follow-up, and this pattern was similar across the 4 practice environments of the participating centers. Conclusions: In a multicenter U.S. cohort with stable chest pain syndromes, stress CMR performed at experienced centers offers effective cardiac prognostication. Patients without CMR ischemia or LGE experienced a low incidence of cardiac events, little need for coronary revascularization, and low spending on subsequent ischemia testing. (Stress CMR Perfusion Imaging in the United States [SPINS]: A Society for Cardiovascular Resonance Registry Study; NCT03192891)

Imaging of clinically unrecognized myocardial fibrosis in patients with suspected coronary artery disease

BACKGROUND: Stress cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) provides accurate assessment of both myocardial infarction (MI) and ischemia. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to evaluate the incremental prognostic value of unrecognized myocardial infarction (UMI), detected during assessment of coronary artery disease (CAD) by stress CMR, beyond cardiac function and ischemia. METHODS: In the multicenter SPINS (Stress CMR Perfusion Imaging in the United States) study, 2,349 consecutive patients (63 ± 11 years of age, 53% were male) with suspected CAD were assessed by stress CMR and followed over a median of 5.4 years. UMI was defined as the presence of late gadolinium enhancement consistent with MI in the absence of medical history of MI. This study investigated the association of UMI with all-cause mortality and nonfatal MI (death and/or MI), and major adverse cardiac events (MACE). RESULTS: UMI was detected in 347 patients (14.8%) and clinically recognized myocardial infarction (RMI) in 358 patients (15.2%). Compared with patients with RMI, patients with UMI had a similar burden of cardiovascular risk factors, but significantly lower left ventricular ejection fraction (p < 0.001) and lower rates of guideline-directed medical therapies, including aspirin (p < 0.001), statin (p < 0.001), and beta-blockers (p = 0.002). During follow-up, 328 deaths and/or MIs and 528 MACE occurred. In univariate analysis, UMI and RMI were strongly associated with death and/or MI (UMI: hazard ratio [HR]: 2.15; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.63 to 2.83; p < 0.001; RMI: HR: 2.45; 95% CI: 1.89 to 3.18) and MACE. Compared with patients with RMI, patients with UMI presented an increased risk for heart failure hospitalization (UMI vs. RMI: HR: 2.60; 95% CI: 1.48 to 4.58; p < 0.001). In a multivariate model including ischemia and left ventricular ejection fraction, UMI and RMI maintained robust prognostic association with death and/or MI (UMI: HR: 1.82; 95% CI: 1.37 to 2.42; p < 0.001; RMI: HR: 1.54; 95% CI: 1.14 to 2.09) and MACE. CONCLUSIONS: In a multicenter cohort of patients with suspected CAD, presence of UMI or RMI portended an equally significant risk for death and/or MI, independently of the presence of ischemia. Compared with RMI patients, those with UMI were less likely to receive guideline-directed medical therapies and presented an increased risk for heart failure hospitalization that warrants further study. (Stress CMR Perfusion Imaging in the United States [SPINS]; NCT03192891

Prognostic value of stress cardiac magnetic resonance in patients with known coronary artery disease

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to determine whether stress cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) provides clinically relevant risk reclassification in patients with known coronary artery disease (CAD) in a multicenter setting in the United States. BACKGROUND: Despite improvements in medical therapy and coronary revascularization, patients with previous CAD account for a disproportionately large portion of CV events and pose a challenge for noninvasive stress testing. METHODS: From the Stress Perfusion Imaging in the United States (SPINS) registry, we identified consecutive patients with documented CAD who were referred to stress CMR for evaluation of myocardial ischemia. The primary outcome was nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI) or cardiovascular (CV) death. Major adverse CV events (MACE) included MI/CV death, hospitalization for heart failure or unstable angina, and late unplanned coronary artery bypass graft. The prognostic association and net reclassification improvement by ischemia for MI/CV death were determined. RESULTS: Out of 755 patients (age 64 ± 11 years, 64% male), we observed 97 MI/CV deaths and 210 MACE over a median follow-up of 5.3 years. Presence of ischemia demonstrated a significant association with MI/CV death (HR: 2.30; 95% CI: 1.54-3.44; P < 0.001) and MACE (HR: 2.24 ([95% CI: 1.69-2.95; P < 0.001). In a multivariate model adjusted for CV risk factors, ischemia maintained strong association with MI/CV death (HR: 1.84; 95% CI: 1.17-2.88; P = 0.008) and MACE (HR: 1.77; 95% CI: 1.31-2.40; P < 0.001) and reclassified 95% of patients at intermediate pretest risk (62% to low risk, 33% to high risk) with corresponding changes in the observed event rates of 1.4% and 5.3% per year for low and high post-test risk, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In a multicenter cohort of patients with known CAD, CMR-assessed ischemia was strongly associated with MI/CV death and reclassified patient risk beyond CV risk factors, especially in those considered to be at intermediate risk. Absence of ischemia was associated with a <2% annual rate of MI/CV death. (Stress CMR Perfusion Imaging in the United States [SPINS] Study; NCT03192891)

Evaluation of stress cardiac magnetic resonance imaging in risk reclassification of patients with suspected coronary artery disease

IMPORTANCE: The role of stress cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging in clinical decision-making by reclassification of risk across American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guideline–recommended categories has not been established. OBJECTIVE: To examine the utility of stress CMR imaging for risk reclassification in patients without a history of coronary artery disease (CAD) who presented with suspected myocardial ischemia. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A retrospective, multicenter cohort study with median follow-up of 5.4 years (interquartile range, 4.6-6.9) was conducted at 13 centers across 11 US states. Participants included 1698 consecutive patients aged 35 to 85 years with 2 or more coronary risk factors but no history of CAD who presented with suspected myocardial ischemia to undergo stress CMR imaging. The study was conducted from February 18, 2019, to March 1, 2020. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Cardiovascular (CV) death and nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI). Major adverse CV events (MACE) including CV death, nonfatal MI, hospitalization for heart failure or unstable angina, and late, unplanned coronary artery bypass graft surgery. RESULTS: Of the 1698 patients, 873 were men (51.4%); mean (SD) age was 62 (11) years, accounting for 67 CV death/nonfatal MIs and 190 MACE. Clinical models of pretest risk were constructed and patients were categorized using guideline-based categories of low (3% year) risk. Stress CMR imaging provided risk reclassification across all baseline models. For CV death/nonfatal MI, adding stress CMR-assessed left ventricular ejection fraction, presence of ischemia, and late gadolinium enhancement to a model incorporating the validated CAD Consortium score, hypertension, smoking, and diabetes provided significant net reclassification improvement of 0.266 (95% CI, 0.091-0.441) and C statistic improvement of 0.086 (95% CI, 0.022-0.149). Stress CMR imaging reclassified 60.3% of patients in the intermediate pretest risk category (52.4% reclassified as low risk and 7.9% as high risk) with corresponding changes in the observed event rates of 0.6% per year for low posttest risk and 4.9% per year for high posttest risk. For MACE, stress CMR imaging further provided significant net reclassification improvement (0.361; 95% CI, 0.255-0.468) and C statistic improvement (0.092; 95% CI, 0.054-0.131), and reclassified 59.9% of patients in the intermediate pretest risk group (48.7% reclassified as low risk and 11.2% as high risk). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this multicenter cohort of patients with no history of CAD presenting with suspected myocardial ischemia, stress CMR imaging reclassified patient risk across guideline-based risk categories, beyond clinical risk factors. The findings of this study support the value of stress CMR imaging for clinical decision-making, especially in patients at intermediate risk for CV death and nonfatal MI

Stress CMR in patients with obesity: insights from the Stress CMR Perfusion Imaging in the United States (SPINS) registry

AIMS: Non-invasive assessment and risk stratification of coronary artery disease in patients with large body habitus is challenging. We aim to examine whether body mass index (BMI) modifies the prognostic value and diagnostic utility of stress cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) in a multicentre registry. METHODS AND RESULTS: The SPINS Registry enrolled consecutive intermediate-risk patients who presented with a clinical indication for stress CMR in the USA between 2008 and 2013. Baseline demographic data including BMI, CMR indices, and ratings of study quality were collected. Primary outcome was defined by a composite of cardiovascular death and non-fatal myocardial infarction. Of the 2345 patients with available BMI included in the SPINS cohort, 1177 (50%) met criteria for obesity (BMI ≥ 30) with 531 (23%) at or above Class 2 obesity (BMI ≥ 35). In all BMI categories, >95% of studies were of diagnostic quality for cine, perfusion, and late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) sequences. At a median follow-up of 5.4 years, those without ischaemia and LGE experienced a low annual rate of hard events (<1%), across all BMI strata. In patients with obesity, both ischaemia [hazard ratio (HR): 2.14; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.30-3.50; P = 0.003] and LGE (HR: 3.09; 95% CI: 1.83-5.22; P < 0.001) maintained strong adjusted association with the primary outcome in a multivariable Cox regression model. Downstream referral rates to coronary angiography, revascularization, and cost of care spent on ischaemia testing did not significantly differ within the BMI categories. CONCLUSION: In this large multicentre registry, elevated BMI did not negatively impact the diagnostic quality and the effectiveness of risk stratification of patients referred for stress CMR

Cost-effectiveness analysis of stress cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging for stable chest pain syndromes

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare, using results from the multicenter SPINS (Stress CMR Perfusion Imaging in the United States) study, the incremental cost-effectiveness of a stress cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR)-first strategy against 4 other clinical strategies for patients with stable symptoms suspicious for myocardial ischemia: 1) immediate x-ray coronary angiography (XCA) with selective fractional flow reserve for all patients; 2) single-photon emission computed tomography; 3) coronary computed tomographic angiography with selective computed tomographic fractional flow reserve; and 4) no imaging. BACKGROUND: Stress CMR perfusion imaging has established excellent diagnostic utility and prognostic value in coronary artery disease (CAD), but its cost-effectiveness in current clinical practice has not been well studied in the United States. METHODS: A decision analytic model was developed to project health care costs and lifetime quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) for symptomatic patients at presentation with a 32.4% prevalence of obstructive CAD. Rates of clinical events, costs, and quality-of-life values were estimated from SPINS and other published research. The analysis was conducted from a U.S. health care system perspective, with health and cost outcomes discounted annually at 3%. RESULTS: Using hard cardiovascular events (cardiovascular death or acute myocardial infarction) as the endpoint, total costs per person were lowest for the no-imaging strategy ($16,936) and highest for the immediate XCA strategy ($20,929). Lifetime QALYs were lowest for the no-imaging strategy (12.72050) and highest for the immediate XCA strategy (12.76535). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for the CMR-based strategy compared with the no-imaging strategy was $52,000/QALY, whereas the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for the immediate XCA strategy was$12 million/QALY compared with CMR. Results were sensitive to variations in model inputs for prevalence of disease, hazard rate ratio for treatment of CAD, and annual discount rate. CONCLUSIONS: Prior to invasive XCA, stress CMR can be a cost-effective gatekeeping tool in patients at risk for obstructive CAD in the United States. (Stress CMR Perfusion Imaging in the United States [SPINS] Study; NCT03192891

Prognostic value of stress CMR perfusion imaging in patients with reduced left ventricular function

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate the prognostic value of stress cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) in patients with reduced left ventricular (LV) systolic function. BACKGROUND: Patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy are at risk from both myocardial ischemia and heart failure. Invasive testing is often used as the first-line investigation, and there is limited evidence as to whether stress testing can effectively provide risk stratification. METHODS: In this substudy of a multicenter registry from 13 U.S. centers, patients with reduced LV ejection fraction (<50%), referred for stress CMR for suspected myocardial ischemia, were included. The primary outcome was cardiovascular death or nonfatal myocardial infarction. The secondary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, hospitalization for unstable angina or congestive heart failure, and unplanned late coronary artery bypass graft surgery. RESULTS: Among 582 patients (mean age 62 ± 12 years, 34% women), 40% had a history of congestive heart failure, and the median LV ejection fraction was 39% (interquartile range: 28% to 45%). At median follow-up of 5.0 years, 97 patients had experienced the primary outcome, and 182 patients had experienced the secondary outcome. Patients with no CMR evidence of ischemia or late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) experienced an annual primary outcome event rate of 1.1%. The presence of ischemia, LGE, or both was associated with higher event rates. In a multivariate model adjusted for clinical covariates, ischemia and LGE were independent predictors of the primary (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.63; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.68 to 4.14; p < 0.001; and HR: 1.86; 95% CI: 1.05 to 3.29; p = 0.03) and secondary (HR: 2.14; 95% CI: 1.55 to 2.95; p < 0.001; and HR 1.70; 95% CI: 1.16 to 2.49; p = 0.007) outcomes. The addition of ischemia and LGE led to improved model discrimination for the primary outcome (change in C statistic from 0.715 to 0.765; p = 0.02). The presence and extent of ischemia were associated with higher rates of use of downstream coronary angiography, revascularization, and cost of care spent on ischemia testing. CONCLUSIONS: Stress CMR was effective in risk-stratifying patients with reduced LV ejection fractions. (Stress CMR Perfusion Imaging in the United States [SPINS] Study; NCT03192891