Prognostic Value of Phase Analysis for Predicting Adverse Cardiac Events Beyond Conventional Single-Photon Emission Computed Tomography Variables: Results From the REFINE SPECT Registry.
Aged
Canada
Coronary Circulation
Disease Progression
Female
Humans
Incidence
Israel
Male
Middle Aged
Myocardial Ischemia
/ diagnostic imaging
Myocardial Perfusion Imaging
Predictive Value of Tests
Prognosis
Registries
Risk Assessment
Risk Factors
Stroke Volume
Tomography, Emission-Computed, Single-Photon
United States
Ventricular Function, Left
entropy
myocardial perfusion imaging
population
prognosis
risk
Journal
Circulation. Cardiovascular imaging
ISSN: 1942-0080
Titre abrégé: Circ Cardiovasc Imaging
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101479935
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
07 2021
07 2021
Historique:
pubmed:
21
7
2021
medline:
30
11
2021
entrez:
20
7
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Phase analysis of single-photon emission computed tomography myocardial perfusion imaging provides dyssynchrony information which correlates well with assessments by echocardiography, but the independent prognostic significance is not well defined. This study assessed the independent prognostic value of single-photon emission computed tomography-myocardial perfusion imaging phase analysis in the largest multinational registry to date across all modalities. From the REFINE SPECT (Registry of Fast Myocardial Perfusion Imaging With Next Generation SPECT), a total of 19 210 patients were included (mean age 63.8±12.0 years and 56% males). Poststress total perfusion deficit, left ventricular ejection fraction, and phase variables (phase entropy, bandwidth, and SD) were obtained automatically. Cox proportional hazards analyses were performed to assess associations with major adverse cardiac events (MACE). During a follow-up of 4.5±1.7 years, 2673 (13.9%) patients experienced MACE. Annualized MACE rates increased with phase variables and were ≈4-fold higher between the second and highest decile group for entropy (1.7% versus 6.7%). Optimal phase variable cutoff values stratified MACE risk in patients with normal and abnormal total perfusion deficit and left ventricular ejection fraction. Only entropy was independently associated with MACE. The addition of phase entropy significantly improved the discriminatory power for MACE prediction when added to the model with total perfusion deficit and left ventricular ejection fraction ( In a largest to date imaging study, widely representative, international cohort, phase variables were independently associated with MACE and improved risk stratification for MACE beyond the prediction by perfusion and left ventricular ejection fraction assessment alone. Phase analysis can be obtained fully automatically, without additional radiation exposure or cost to improve MACE risk prediction and, therefore, should be routinely reported for single-photon emission computed tomography-myocardial perfusion imaging studies.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Phase analysis of single-photon emission computed tomography myocardial perfusion imaging provides dyssynchrony information which correlates well with assessments by echocardiography, but the independent prognostic significance is not well defined. This study assessed the independent prognostic value of single-photon emission computed tomography-myocardial perfusion imaging phase analysis in the largest multinational registry to date across all modalities.
METHODS
From the REFINE SPECT (Registry of Fast Myocardial Perfusion Imaging With Next Generation SPECT), a total of 19 210 patients were included (mean age 63.8±12.0 years and 56% males). Poststress total perfusion deficit, left ventricular ejection fraction, and phase variables (phase entropy, bandwidth, and SD) were obtained automatically. Cox proportional hazards analyses were performed to assess associations with major adverse cardiac events (MACE).
RESULTS
During a follow-up of 4.5±1.7 years, 2673 (13.9%) patients experienced MACE. Annualized MACE rates increased with phase variables and were ≈4-fold higher between the second and highest decile group for entropy (1.7% versus 6.7%). Optimal phase variable cutoff values stratified MACE risk in patients with normal and abnormal total perfusion deficit and left ventricular ejection fraction. Only entropy was independently associated with MACE. The addition of phase entropy significantly improved the discriminatory power for MACE prediction when added to the model with total perfusion deficit and left ventricular ejection fraction (
CONCLUSIONS
In a largest to date imaging study, widely representative, international cohort, phase variables were independently associated with MACE and improved risk stratification for MACE beyond the prediction by perfusion and left ventricular ejection fraction assessment alone. Phase analysis can be obtained fully automatically, without additional radiation exposure or cost to improve MACE risk prediction and, therefore, should be routinely reported for single-photon emission computed tomography-myocardial perfusion imaging studies.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34281372
doi: 10.1161/CIRCIMAGING.120.012386
pmc: PMC8978932
mid: NIHMS1792910
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Observational Study
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e012386Subventions
Organisme : NHLBI NIH HHS
ID : R01 HL089765
Pays : United States
Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Références
J Nucl Cardiol. 2005 Nov-Dec;12(6):687-95
pubmed: 16344231
JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2020 Mar;13(3):774-785
pubmed: 31202740
J Nucl Cardiol. 2011 Feb;18(1):36-42
pubmed: 21104361
Am J Cardiol. 2009 Jan 15;103(2):212-5
pubmed: 19121438
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2007 Jul;34(7):1088-96
pubmed: 17219133
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2012 Oct;39(10):1561-9
pubmed: 22752450
J Nucl Cardiol. 2018 Oct;25(5):1677-1687
pubmed: 28176257
EJNMMI Res. 2017 Dec;7(1):27
pubmed: 28337725
Circulation. 2002 Aug 6;106(6):718-24
pubmed: 12163433
Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2020 May 1;21(5):567-575
pubmed: 31302679
J Nucl Cardiol. 2021 Jun;28(3):1140-1150
pubmed: 32060855
J Nucl Med. 1995 Nov;36(11):2138-47
pubmed: 7472611
J Nucl Cardiol. 2021 Feb;28(1):162-171
pubmed: 31087265
J Nucl Med. 2009 May;50(5):718-25
pubmed: 19403876
Heart. 2011 Jan;97(1):33-7
pubmed: 20962345
J Nucl Cardiol. 2020 Jun;27(3):1010-1021
pubmed: 29923104
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007 Oct 2;50(14):1315-23
pubmed: 17903629
JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2021 Mar;14(3):644-653
pubmed: 32828784
Circ J. 2012;76(8):1942-52
pubmed: 22664417
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2017 Feb;44(2):259-266
pubmed: 27752746
Circulation. 1999 Sep 7;100(10):1035-42
pubmed: 10477527
J Nucl Cardiol. 2011 Aug;18(4):685-94
pubmed: 21567281
Stat Med. 2013 Jun 30;32(14):2430-42
pubmed: 23037800
Cancer. 1950 Jan;3(1):32-5
pubmed: 15405679
Am J Cardiol. 2000 Dec 1;86(11):1171-5
pubmed: 11090786
J Nucl Med. 2008 Nov;49(11):1790-7
pubmed: 18927331
J Nucl Cardiol. 2017 Apr;24(2):482-490
pubmed: 26809439
Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2018 Oct;11(10):e008186
pubmed: 30354484
J Nucl Cardiol. 2019 Feb;26(1):288-297
pubmed: 28432673
J Nucl Cardiol. 2017 Apr;24(2):611-621
pubmed: 26860109