首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Springer Open Choice >Infarct tissue characterization in implantable cardioverter-defibrillator recipients for primary versus secondary prevention following myocardial infarction: a study with contrast-enhancement cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging
【2h】

Infarct tissue characterization in implantable cardioverter-defibrillator recipients for primary versus secondary prevention following myocardial infarction: a study with contrast-enhancement cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging

机译:心肌梗死后一级或二级预防性植入式心脏复律除颤器接受者的梗塞组织表征:一项对比增强心血管磁共振成像的研究

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Knowledge about potential differences in infarct tissue characteristics between patients with prior life-threatening ventricular arrhythmia versus patients receiving prophylactic implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) might help to improve the current risk stratification in myocardial infarction (MI) patients who are considered for ICD implantation. In a consecutive series of (ICD) recipients for primary and secondary prevention following MI, we used contrast-enhanced (CE) cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging to evaluate differences in infarct tissue characteristics. Cine-CMR measurements included left ventricular end-diastolic and end-systolic volumes (EDV, ESV), left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), wall motion score index (WMSI), and mass. CE-CMR images were analyzed for core, peri, and total infarct size, infarct localization (according to coronary artery territory), and transmural extent. In this study, 95 ICD recipients were included. In the primary prevention group (n = 66), LVEF was lower (23 ± 9 % vs. 31 ± 14 %; P < 0.01), ESV and WMSI were higher (223 ± 75 ml vs. 184 ± 97 ml, P = 0.04, and 1.89 ± 0.52 vs. 1.47 ± 0.68; P < 0.01), and anterior infarct localization was more frequent (P = 0.02) than in the secondary prevention group (n = 29). There were no differences in infarct tissue characteristics between patients treated for primary versus secondary prevention (P > 0.6 for all). During 21 ± 9 months of follow-up, 3 (5 %) patients in the primary prevention group and 9 (31 %) in the secondary prevention group experienced appropriate ICD therapy for treatment of ventricular arrhythmia (P < 0.01). There was no difference in infarct tissue characteristics between recipients of ICD for primary versus secondary prevention, while the secondary prevention group showed a higher frequency of applied ICD therapy for ventricular arrhythmia.
机译:先前有危及生命的室性心律失常患者与接受预防性植入式心脏除颤器(ICD)的患者之间梗死组织特征的潜在差异的知识可能有助于改善目前考虑植入ICD的心肌梗死(MI)患者的危险分层。在连续的一系列针对心梗后一级和二级预防的(ICD)接受者中,我们使用了造影剂(CE)心血管磁共振(CMR)成像来评估梗塞组织特征的差异。电影CMR测量包括左心室舒张末期和收缩末期容积(EDV,ESV),左心室射血分数(LVEF),壁运动评分指数(WMSI)和质量。 CE-CMR图像分析了核心,周围和总梗死面积,梗死位置(根据冠状动脉区域)和透壁程度。在这项研究中,包括95名ICD接受者。在一级预防组中(n = 66),LVEF较低(23±9%比31±14%; P <0.01),ESV和WMSI较高(223±75ml对184±97ml,P = 0.04和1.89±0.52比1.47±0.68; P <0.01),并且与二级预防组相比,前梗死的定位频率更高(P = 0.02)(n = 29)。在进行一级预防和二级预防的患者之间,梗塞组织特征无差异(全部P> 0.6)。在随访的21±9个月中,一级预防组中的3(5%)患者和二级预防组中的9(31%)患者经历了适当的ICD治疗室性心律失常的治疗(P <0.01)。一级预防和二级预防的ICD接受者之间的梗塞组织特征无差异,而二级预防组显示ICD治疗室性心律失常的频率更高。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号