Cardiac Magnetic Resonance and Myocardial Viability: Why Is It so Important?

1. Florian A, Jurcut R, Ginghina C, Bogaret J. Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Ischemic Heart Disease – A Clinical Review. J Med Life. 2011;4:330-345.Search in Google Scholar

2. Saeed M, Van TA, Krug R, Hetts SW, Wilson MW. Cardiac MR imaging: current status and future direction. Cardiovasc Diagn Ther. 2015;5:290-310.Search in Google Scholar

3. Partington SL, Kwong RY, Dorbala S. Multimodality imaging in the assessment of myocardial viability. Heart Fail Rev. 2011;16:381-395.10.1007/s10741-010-9201-7Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

4. Bhat A, Gan GC, Tan TC, Hsu C, Denniss AR. Myocardial Viability: From Proof of Concept to Clinical Practice. Cardiol Res Pract. 2016;2016:1020818.10.1155/2016/1020818Search in Google Scholar

5. Kim EK, Song YB, Chang SA, et al. Is cardiac magnetic resonance necessary for prediction of left ventricular remodeling in patients with reperfused ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction? Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2017. doi: 10.1007/s10554-017-1206-z. [Epub ahead of print]10.1007/s10554-017-1206-z.[EpubaheadprintOpen DOISearch in Google Scholar

6. Richardson WJ, Clarke SA, Quinn TA, Holmes JW. Physiological Implications of Myocardial Scar Structure. Compr Physiol. 2016;5:1877-1909.Search in Google Scholar

7. Mester A, Oltean-Péter B, Rodean I, et al. Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Myocardial Function Following Intracoronary and Intramyocardial Stem Cell Injection. Journal of Interdisciplinary Medicine. 2017;2:112-116.10.1515/jim-2017-0053Search in Google Scholar

8. Bax JJ, Delgado V. Myocardial viability as integral part of the diagnostic and therapeutic approach to ischemic heart failure. J Nucl Cardiol. 2015;22:229-245.10.1007/s12350-015-0096-5Search in Google Scholar

9. Saeed M, Liu H, Liang CH, Wilson MW. Magnetic resonance imaging for characterizing myocardial diseases. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2017. doi: 10.1007/s10554-017-1127-x. [Epub ahead of print]10.1007/s10554-017-1127-x.[EpubaheadprintOpen DOISearch in Google Scholar

10. Buckert D, Kelle S, Buss S, et al. Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction and Presence of Myocardial Necrosis Assessed by Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging Correctly Risk Stratify Patients With Stable Coronary Artery Disease: A Multi-Center All-Comers Trial. Clin Res Cardiol. 2016;106:219-229.10.1007/s00392-016-1042-527738810Search in Google Scholar

11. Hassanein AS, Khalifa AM, Ibrahim el-SH. Cine Viability Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Heart Without Increased Scan Time. Magn Reson Imaging. 2015;34:183-190.10.1016/j.mri.2015.10.03026528793Search in Google Scholar

12. Souto ALM, Souto RM, Teixeira ICR, Nacif MS. Myocardial Viability on Cardiac Magnetic Resonance. Arq Bras Cardiol. 2017;108:458-469.10.5935/abc.20170056544489328591322Search in Google Scholar

13. Masci PG, Bogaert J. Post myocardial infarction of the left ventricle: the course ahead seen by cardiac MRI. Cardiovasc Diagn Ther. 2012;2:113-127.Search in Google Scholar

14. Shabana A, El-Menyar A. Myocardial Viability: What We Knew and What Is New. Cardiol Res Pract. 2012;2012:607486.10.1155/2012/607486344085422988540Search in Google Scholar

15. Bordi L, Kovacs I, Bajka B, et al. New Imaging-based Tools for the Assessment of Ventricular Function in Ischemic Heart Diseases. Journal of Interdisciplinary Medicine. 2017;2:31-35.10.1515/jim-2017-0020Search in Google Scholar

16. West AM, Kramer CM. Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Myocardial Infarction, Viability, and Cardiomyopathies. Curr Probl Cardiol. 2010;35:176-220.10.1016/j.cpcardiol.2009.12.002Search in Google Scholar

17. Perrone-Filardi P, Bacharach SL, Dilsizian V, et al. Metabolic evidence of viable myocardium in regions with reduced wall thickness and absent wall thickening in patients with chronic ischemic left ventricular dysfunction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1992;20:161-168.10.1016/0735-1097(92)90153-EOpen DOISearch in Google Scholar

18. Bove CM, DiMaria JM, Voros S, Conaway MR, Kramer CM. Dobutamine response and myocardial infarct transmurality: functional improvement after coronary artery bypass grafting—initial experience. Radiology. 2006;240:835-841.10.1148/radiol.240305115016926330Search in Google Scholar

19. Health Quality Ontario. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for the assessment of myocardial viability: an evidence-based analysis. Ont Health Technol Assess Ser. 2010;10:1-45.Search in Google Scholar

20. Arai AE. The cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) approach to assessing myocardial viability. J Nucl Cardiol. 2011;18:1095-1102.10.1007/s12350-011-9441-5350138521882082Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

21. Schinkel AF, Poldermans D, Elhendy A, Bax JJ. Assessment of myocardial viability in patients with heart failure. J Nucl Med. 2007;48:1135-1146.10.2967/jnumed.106.03885117574986Search in Google Scholar

22. Kim RJ, Albert TSE, Wible JH, et al. Performance of delayed-enhancement myocardial resonance imaging with gadoversetamide contrast for the detection and assessment of myocardial infarction. Circulation. 2008;117:629-637.10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.107.72326218212288Search in Google Scholar

23. Jimenez JL, Crean AM, Wintersperger BJ. Late gadolinium enhancement imaging in assessment of myocardial viability: techniques and clinical applications. Radiol Clin North Am. 2015;53:397-411.10.1016/j.rcl.2014.11.00425727002Search in Google Scholar

24. Ahmed N, Carrick D, Layland J, Oldroyd KG, Berry C. The role of cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Heart Lung Circ. 2013;22:243-255.10.1016/j.hlc.2012.11.01623279917Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

25. Rubenstein JC, Lee DC, Wu E, et al. A comparison of cardiac magnetic resonance imaging peri-infarct border zone quantification strategies for the prediction of ventricular tachyarrhythmia inducibility. Cardiol J. 2013;20:68-77.10.5603/CJ.2013.001123558813Search in Google Scholar

26. Ortiz-Perez JT, Rodriguez J, Meyers SN, Lee DC, Davidson C, Wu E. Correspondence between the 17-segment model and coronary arterial imaging using contrast-enhanced cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol Img. 2008;1:282-293.10.1016/j.jcmg.2008.01.01419356440Search in Google Scholar

27. Lund GK, Stork A, Saeed M, et al. Acute myocardial infarction: evaluation with first-pass enhancement and delayed enhancement MR imaging compared with 201Tl SPECT imaging. Radiology. 2004;232:49-57.10.1148/radiol.232103112715166320Search in Google Scholar

28. Saeed M, Hetts SW, Jablonowski R, Wilson MW. Magnetic resonance imaging and multi-detector computed tomography assessment of extracellular compartment in ischemic and non-ischemic myocardial pathologies. World J Cardiol. 2014;6:1192-1208.10.4330/wjc.v6.i11.1192424461625429331Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

29. Bodi V, Sanchis J, Nunez J, et al. Prognostic value of a comprehensive cardiac magnetic resonance assessment soon after a first ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol Img. 2009;2:835-842.10.1016/j.jcmg.2009.03.01119608133Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

30. Wu E, Ortiz JT, Tejedor P, et al. Infarct size by contrast enhanced cardiac magnetic resonance is a stronger predictor of outcomes than left ventricular ejection fraction or end-systolic volume index: prospective cohort study. Heart. 2008;94:730-736.10.1136/hrt.2007.12262218070953Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

31. Buckert D, Dewes P, Walcher T, et al. Intermediate-term prognostic value of reversible perfusion deficit diagnosed by adenosine CMR: a prospective follow-up study in a consecutive patient population. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2013;6:56-63.10.1016/j.jcmg.2012.08.01123328562Search in Google Scholar

32. Zemrak F, Petersen SE. Late gadolinium enhancement CMR predicts adverse cardiovascular outcomes and mortality in patients with coronary artery disease: systematic review and meta-analysis. Prog Cardiovasc Dis. 2011;54:215-229.10.1016/j.pcad.2011.07.00322014489Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

33. Rizzi PB, Nacif M, Volpe GJ, et al. Quantification of myocardial scar assessed by late gadolinium enhancement CMR in the multi-ethnics study of atherosclerosis: comparisons of 7 different methods. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2013;15:O49.10.1186/1532-429X-15-S1-O49Search in Google Scholar

34. Reimer KA, Jennings RB. The changing anatomic reference base of evolving myocardial infarction. Underestimation of myocardial collateral blood flow and overestimation of experimental anatomic infarct size due to tissue edema, hemorrhage and acute inflammation. Circulation. 1979;60:866-876.10.1161/01.CIR.60.4.866Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

35. Choi CJ, Haji-Momenian S, DiMaria JM, et al. Infarct involution and improved function during healing of acute myocardial infarction: the role of microvascular obstruction. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2004;6:917-925.10.1081/JCMR-200036206Search in Google Scholar

36. Wu KC, Kim RJ, Bleumke DA, et al. Quantification and time course of microvascular obstruction by contrast-enhanced echocardiography and magnetic resonance imaging following acute myocardial infarction and reperfusion. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1998;32:1756-1764.10.1016/S0735-1097(98)00429-XOpen DOISearch in Google Scholar

37. Lima JAC, Judd RM, Bazille A, et al. Regional Heterogeneity of Human Myocardial Infarcts Demonstrated by Contrast-Enhanced MRI. Circulation. 1995;92:1117-1125.10.1161/01.CIR.92.5.1117Search in Google Scholar

38. Rogers WJ Jr, Kramer CM, Geskin G, et al. Early contrast-enhanced MRI predicts late functional recovery after reperfused myocardial infarction. Circulation. 1999;99:744-750.10.1161/01.CIR.99.6.744Search in Google Scholar

39. Kramer CM. The prognostic significance of microvascular obstruction after myocardial infarction as defined by cardiac magnetic resonance. Eur Heart J. 2005;26:532-533.10.1093/eurheartj/ehi15615713691Search in Google Scholar

40. Tarantini G, Cacciavillani L, Corbetti F, et al. Duration of ischemia is a major determinant of transmurality and severe microvascular obstruction after primary angioplasty: a study performed with contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005;46:1229-1235.10.1016/j.jacc.2005.06.05416198836Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

41. Deneke T, Muller KM, Lemke B, et al. Human histopathology of electroanatomic mapping after cooled-tip radiofrequency ablation to treat ventricular tachycardia in remote myocardial infarction. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2005;16:1246-1251.10.1111/j.1540-8167.2005.40826.x16302912Search in Google Scholar

42. Roes SD, Kelle S, Kaandorp TA, et al. Comparison of myocardial infarct size assessed with contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging and left ventricular function and volumes to predict mortality in patients with healed myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol. 2007;100:930-936.1782637210.1016/j.amjcard.2007.04.02917826372Search in Google Scholar

43. Wu KC, Zerhouni EA, Judd RM, et al. Prognostic significance of microvascular obstruction by magnetic resonance imaging in patients with acute myocardial infarction. Circulation. 1998;97:765-772.10.1161/01.CIR.97.8.7659498540Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

44. Friedrich MG, Abdel-Aty H, Taylor A, et al. The salvaged area at risk in reperfused acute myocardial infarction as visualized by cardiovascular magnetic resonance. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008;51:1581-1587.10.1016/j.jacc.2008.01.01918420102Search in Google Scholar

45. Abdel-Aty H, Zagrosek A, Schulz-Menger J, et al. Delayed enhancement and T2-weighted cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging differentiate acute from chronic myocardial infarction. Circulation. 2004;109:2411-2416.10.1161/01.CIR.0000127428.10985.C615123531Search in Google Scholar

46. Dall’Armellina E, Piechnik SK, Ferreira VM, et al. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance by non-contrast T1-mapping allows assessment of severity of injury in acute myocardial infarction. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2012;14:15.10.1186/1532-429X-14-15331286922309452Search in Google Scholar

47. Ugander M, Oki AJ, Hsu LY, et al. Extracellular volume imaging by magnetic resonance imaging provides insights into overt and subclinical myocardial pathology. Eur Heart J. 2012;33:1268-1278.10.1093/eurheartj/ehr481335098522279111Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

48. West AM, Kramer CM. Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Myocardial Infarction, Viability, and Cardiomyopathies. Curr Probl Cardiol. 2010;35:176-220.10.1016/j.cpcardiol.2009.12.002286135920197150Search in Google Scholar

49. Nagel E, Lehmkuhl HB, Bocksch W, et al. Noninvasive diagnosis of ischemia-induced wall motion abnormalities with the use of high dose dobutamine stress MRI: comparison with dobutamine stress echocardiography. Circulation. 1999;99:763-770.10.1161/01.CIR.99.6.7639989961Search in Google Scholar

50. Hundley WG, Hamilton CA, Clarke GD, et al. Visualization and functional assessment of proximal and middle left anterior descending coronary stenoses in humans with magnetic resonance imaging. Circulation. 1999;99:3248-3254.10.1161/01.CIR.99.25.3248Search in Google Scholar

51. Morariu M, Bordi L, Opincariu D, Ratiu M, Condrea S, Benedek A, Benedek T. New Developments in Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Myocardial Diseases – Technical Aspects and Clinical Applications. Journal of Interdisciplinary Medicine. 2017;2:17-21.10.1515/jim-2017-0022Search in Google Scholar

52. Barkhausen J, Hunold P, Jochims M, Debatin JF. Imaging of myocardial perfusion with magnetic resonance. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2004;19:750-757.10.1002/jmri.2007315170781Open DOISearch in Google Scholar