Absence of late gadolinium enhancement on cardiac magnetic resonance imaging in ventricular fibrillation and nonischemic cardiomyopathy

Introduction Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR)‐identified late gadolinium enhancement (LGE), representing regional fibrosis, is often used to predict ventricular arrhythmia risk in nonischemic cardiomyopathy (NICM). However, LGE is more closely correlated with sustained monomorphic ventricular tachyc...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Pacing and clinical electrophysiology 2018-09, Vol.41 (9), p.1109-1115
Hauptverfasser: Voskoboinik, Aleksandr, Wong, Michael C. G., Elliott, Jessica K., Costello, Benedict T., Prabhu, Sandeep, Mariani, Justin A., Kalman, Jonathan M., Kistler, Peter M., Taylor, Andrew J., Morton, Joseph B.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Introduction Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR)‐identified late gadolinium enhancement (LGE), representing regional fibrosis, is often used to predict ventricular arrhythmia risk in nonischemic cardiomyopathy (NICM). However, LGE is more closely correlated with sustained monomorphic ventricular tachycardia (SMVT) than ventricular fibrillation (VF). We characterized CMR findings of ventricular LGE in VF survivors. Methods We examined consecutively resuscitated VF survivors undergoing contrast‐enhanced 1.5T CMR between 9/2007 and 7/2016. We excluded coronary artery disease, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, amyloid, sarcoid, arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy, and channelopathy. Preexisting implantable cardioverter‐defibrillator (ICD) was a CMR contraindication. VF patients were divided into three groups: (1) NICM, (2) left ventricular (LV) dilatation with normal LV ejection fraction (LVEF), and (3) normal LV size and LVEF. Two groups of NICM patients with and without SMVT were examined for comparison. Results We analyzed 87 VF patients, and found that LGE was seen in 8/22 (36%) with NICM (LVEF 38 ± 11%, LV end‐diastolic volume index [LVEDVI] 134 ± 68 mL/BSA), 11/40 (28%) with LV dilatation and normal LVEF (LVEDVI 103 ± 17 mL/BSA), 4/25 (16%) with normal LV size and LVEF. Incidence of LGE in NICM patients without prior ventricular tachycardia/VF (LVEF 36 ± 12%, LVEDVI 141 ± 46 mL/body surface area [BSA]) was 117/277 and was not lower than those with VF and NICM (42% vs 36%; P = 0.59). By contrast, 22/37 NICM patients with SMVT (LVEF 42 ± 11%, LVEDVI 123 ± 48 mL/BSA) were LGE‐positive (59% NICM‐SMVT vs 36% NICM‐VF; P = 0.04). Conclusion Most VF survivors with a diagnosis of NICM did not have LGE on CMR and would not have met primary prevention ICD criteria based on LVEF. Absence of LGE may not portend a benign prognosis in NICM. Novel strategies for determining SCD risk in this cohort are required.
ISSN:0147-8389
1540-8159
DOI:10.1111/pace.13426