作者
Marco Guglielmo,Marco Penso,Maria Ludovica Carerj,Carlo Maria Giacari,Alessandra Volpe,Laura Fusini,Andrea Baggiano,Saima Mushtaq,Andrea Annoni,F. Cannata,Francesco Cilia,Alberico Del Torto,Fabio Fazzari,Alberto Formenti,Antonio Frappampina,Paola Gripari,Daniele Junod,Maria Elisabetta Mancini,Valentina Mantegazza,Riccardo Maragna,Francesca Marchetti,Giorgio Mastroiacovo,Sergio Pirola,Luigi Tassetti,Francesca Baessato,Valentina Corino,Andrea Igoren Guaricci,Mark Rabbat,Alexia Rossi,Chiara Rovera,Pietro Costantini,Ivo van der Bilt,Pim van der Harst,Marianna Fontana,Enrico G. Caiani,Mauro Pepi,Gianluca Pontone
摘要
Background and aims This study investigated the additional prognostic value of epicardial adipose tissue (EAT) volume for major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in patients undergoing stress cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging. Methods 730 consecutive patients [mean age: 63±10 years; 616 men] who underwent stress CMR for known or suspected coronary artery disease were randomly divided into derivation (n=365) and validation (n=365) cohorts. MACE was defined as non-fatal myocardial infarction and cardiac deaths. A deep learning algorithm was developed and trained to quantify EAT volume from CMR. EAT volume was adjusted for height (EAT volume index). A composite CMR-based risk score by Cox analysis of the risk of MACE was created. Results In the derivation cohort, 32 patients (8.7%) developed MACE during a follow-up of 2103 days. Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) <35% (HR 4.407 [95% CI 1.903-10.202]; p<0.001), stress perfusion defect (HR 3.550 [95% CI 1.765-7.138]; p<0.001), late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) (HR 4.428 [95%CI 1.822-10.759]; p=0.001) and EAT volume index (HR 1.082 [95% CI 1.045-1.120]; p<0.001) were independent predictors of MACE. In a multivariate Cox regression analysis, adding EAT volume index to a composite risk score including LVEF, stress perfusion defect and LGE provided additional value in MACE prediction, with a net reclassification improvement of 0.683 (95%CI, 0.336-1.03; p<0.001).The combined evaluation of risk score and EAT volume index showed a higher Harrel C statistic as compared to risk score (0.85 vs. 0.76; p<0.001) and EAT volume index alone (0.85 vs.0.74; p<0.001).These findings were confirmed in the validation cohort. Conclusions In patients with clinically indicated stress CMR, fully automated EAT volume measured by deep learning can provide additional prognostic information on top of standard clinical and imaging parameters.