Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging
Published in: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging 1/2023

03-10-2023 | Positron Emission Tomography | Original Article

Integrated myocardial flow reserve (iMFR) assessment: diffuse atherosclerosis and microvascular dysfunction are more strongly associated with mortality than focally impaired perfusion

Authors: Jonathan B. Moody, Alexis Poitrasson-Rivière, Jennifer M. Renaud, Tomoe Hagio, Mouaz H. Al-Mallah, Richard L. Weinberg, Edward P. Ficaro, Venkatesh L. Murthy

Published in: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging | Issue 1/2023

Login to get access

Abstract

Background and aims

Although treatment of ischemia-causing epicardial stenoses may improve symptoms of ischemia, current evidence does not suggest that revascularization improves survival. Conventional myocardial ischemia imaging does not uniquely identify diffuse atherosclerosis, microvascular dysfunction, or nonobstructive epicardial stenoses. We sought to evaluate the prognostic value of integrated myocardial flow reserve (iMFR), a novel noninvasive approach to distinguish the perfusion impact of focal atherosclerosis from diffuse coronary disease.

Methods

This study analyzed a large single-center registry of consecutive patients clinically referred for rest-stress myocardial perfusion positron emission tomography. Cox proportional hazards modeling was used to assess the association of two previously reported and two novel perfusion measures with mortality risk: global stress myocardial blood flow (MBF); global myocardial flow reserve (MFR); and two metrics derived from iMFR analysis: the extents of focal and diffusely impaired perfusion.

Results

In total, 6867 patients were included with a median follow-up of 3.4 years [1st–3rd quartiles, 1.9–5.0] and 1444 deaths (21%). Although all evaluated perfusion measures were independently associated with death, diffusely impaired perfusion extent (hazard ratio 2.65, 95%C.I. [2.37–2.97]) and global MFR (HR 2.29, 95%C.I. [2.08–2.52]) were consistently stronger predictors than stress MBF (HR 1.62, 95%C.I. [1.46–1.79]). Focally impaired perfusion extent (HR 1.09, 95%C.I. [1.03–1.16]) was only moderately related to mortality. Diffusely impaired perfusion extent remained a significant independent predictor of death when combined with global MFR (p < 0.0001), providing improved risk stratification (overall net reclassification improvement 0.246, 95%C.I. [0.183–0.310]).

Conclusions

The extent of diffusely impaired perfusion is a strong independent and additive marker of mortality risk beyond traditional risk factors, standard perfusion imaging, and global MFR, while focally impaired perfusion is only moderately related to mortality.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Spertus JA, Jones PG, Maron DJ, O’Brien SM, Reynolds HR, Rosenberg Y, et al. Health-status outcomes with invasive or conservative care in coronary disease. N Engl J Med. 2020;382(15):1408–19.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
2.
Al-Lamee RK, Shun-Shin MJ, Howard JP, Nowbar AN, Rajkumar C, Thompson D, et al. Dobutamine stress echocardiography ischemia as a predictor of the placebo-controlled efficacy of percutaneous coronary intervention in stable coronary artery disease. The stress echocardiography–stratified analysis of ORBITA. Circulation. 2019;140(24):1971–80.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
3.
Boden WE, O’Rourke RA, Teo KK, Hartigan PM, Maron DJ, Kostuk WJ, et al. Optimal medical therapy with or without PCI for stable coronary disease. N Engl J Med. 2007;356(15):1503–16.PubMedCrossRef
4.
Maron DJ, Hochman JS, Reynolds HR, Bangalore S, O’Brien SM, Boden WE, et al. Initial invasive or conservative strategy for stable coronary disease. N Engl J Med. 2020;382(15):1395–407.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
5.
Soares A, Boden WE, Hueb W, Brooks MM, Vlachos HEA, O’Fee K, et al. Death and myocardial infarction following initial revascularization versus optimal medical therapy in chronic coronary syndromes with myocardial ischemia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of contemporary randomized controlled trials. J Am Heart Assoc. 2021;10(2): e019114.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
6.
Shaw LJ, Iskandrian AE. Prognostic value of gated myocardial perfusion SPECT. J Nucl Cardiol. 2004;11(2):171–85.PubMedCrossRef
7.
Janse MJ, Wit AL. Electrophysiological mechanisms of ventricular arrhythmias resulting from myocardial ischemia and infarction. Physiol Rev. 1989;69(4):1049–169.PubMedCrossRef
8.
Leone BJ, Norris RM, Safwat A, Foëx P, Ryder WA. Effects of progressive myocardial ischaemia on systolic function, diastolic dysfunction, and load dependent relaxation. Cardiovasc Res. 1992;26(4):422–9.PubMedCrossRef
9.
Vilahur G, Juan-Babot O, Peña E, Oñate B, Casaní L, Badimon L. Molecular and cellular mechanisms involved in cardiac remodeling after acute myocardial infarction. J Mol Cell Cardiol. 2011;50(3):522–33.PubMedCrossRef
10.
Gupta A, Taqueti VR, van de Hoef TP, Bajaj NS, Bravo PE, Murthy VL, et al. Integrated noninvasive physiological assessment of coronary circulatory function and impact on cardiovascular mortality in patients with stable coronary artery disease. Circulation. 2017;136(24):2325–36.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
11.
Murthy VL, Naya M, Foster CR, Hainer J, Gaber M, Di Carli G, et al. Improved cardiac risk assessment with noninvasive measures of coronary flow reserve. Circulation. 2011;124(20):2215–24.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
12.
Ziadi MC, deKemp RA, Williams KA, Guo A, Chow BJW, Renaud JM, et al. Impaired myocardial flow reserve on rubidium-82 positron emission tomography imaging predicts adverse outcomes in patients assessed for myocardial ischemia. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;58(7):740–8.PubMedCrossRef
13.
Herzog BA, Husmann L, Valenta I, Gaemperli O, Siegrist PT, Tay FM, et al. Long-term prognostic value of 13N-ammonia myocardial perfusion positron emission tomography: added value of coronary flow reserve. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;54(2):150–6.PubMedCrossRef
14.
Fukushima K, Javadi MS, Higuchi T, Lautamäki R, Merrill J, Nekolla SG, et al. Prediction of short-term cardiovascular events using quantification of global myocardial flow reserve in patients referred for clinical 82Rb PET perfusion imaging. J Nucl Med. 2011;52(5):726–32.PubMedCrossRef
15.
Patel KK, Spertus JA, Chan PS, Sperry BW, Al Badarin F, Kennedy KF, et al. Myocardial blood flow reserve assessed by positron emission tomography myocardial perfusion imaging identifies patients with a survival benefit from early revascularization. Eur Heart J. 2020;41(6):759–68.PubMedCrossRef
16.
Gould KL, Johnson NP, Roby AE, Nguyen T, Kirkeeide R, Haynie M, et al. Regional, artery-specific thresholds of quantitative myocardial perfusion by PET associated with reduced myocardial infarction and death after revascularization in stable coronary artery disease. J Nucl Med. 2019;60(3):410–7.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
17.
Gould KL, Kitkungvan D, Johnson NP, Nguyen T, Kirkeeide R, Bui L, et al. Mortality prediction by quantitative PET perfusion expressed as coronary flow capacity with and without revascularization. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2021;14(5):1020–34.PubMedCrossRef
18.
Ficaro EP, Lee BC, Kritzman JN, Corbett JR. Corridor4DM: the Michigan method for quantitative nuclear cardiology. J Nucl Cardiol. 2007;14(4):455–65.PubMedCrossRef
19.
Lee BC, Moody JB, Poitrasson-Rivière A, Melvin AC, Weinberg RL, Corbett JR, et al. Automated dynamic motion correction using normalized gradient fields for 82rubidium PET myocardial blood flow quantification. J Nucl Cardiol. 2020;28:1982–98.CrossRef
20.
Slomka PJ, Nishina H, Berman DS, Akincioglu C, Abidov A, Friedman JD, et al. Automated quantification of myocardial perfusion SPECT using simplified normal limits. J Nucl Cardiol. 2005;12(1):66–77.PubMedCrossRef
21.
Lortie M, Beanlands RSB, Yoshinaga K, Klein R, Dasilva JN, DeKemp RA. Quantification of myocardial blood flow with 82Rb dynamic PET imaging. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2007;34(11):1765–74.PubMedCrossRef
22.
Moody JB, Murthy VL, Lee BC, Corbett JR, Ficaro EP. Variance estimation for myocardial blood flow by dynamic PET. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2015;34(11):2343–53.PubMedCrossRef
23.
24.
Czernin J, Muller P, Chan S, Brunken R, Porenta G, Krivokapich J, et al. Influence of age and hemodynamics on myocardial blood flow and flow reserve. Circulation. 1993;88(1):62–9.PubMedCrossRef
25.
Gönen M, Heller G. Concordance probability and discriminatory power in proportional hazards regression. Biometrika. 2005;92(4):965–70.CrossRef
26.
Korn EL, Simon R. Measures of explained variation for survival data. Stat Med. 1990;9(5):487–503.PubMedCrossRef
27.
Leening MJG, Vedder MM, Witteman JCM, Pencina MJ, Steyerberg EW. Net Reclassification Improvement: computation, interpretation, and controversies: a literature review and clinician’s guide. Ann Intern Med. 2014;160(2):122–31.PubMedCrossRef
28.
29.
30.
31.
Naya M, Murthy VL, Blankstein R, Sitek A, Hainer J, Foster C, et al. Quantitative relationship between the extent and morphology of coronary atherosclerotic plaque and downstream myocardial perfusion. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;58(17):1807–16.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
32.
Ziadi MC, deKemp RA, Williams K, Guo A, Renaud JM, Chow BJW, et al. Does quantification of myocardial flow reserve using rubidium-82 positron emission tomography facilitate detection of multivessel coronary artery disease? J Nucl Cardiol. 2012;19(4):670–80.PubMedCrossRef
33.
Poitrasson-Rivière A, Moody JB, Renaud JM, et al. Integrated myocardial flow reserve (iMFR) assessment: optimized PET blood flow quantification for diagnosis of coronary artery disease. European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging 2023;In press.
34.
Little WC, Constantinescu M, Applegate RJ, Kutcher MA, Burrows MT, Kahl FR, et al. Can coronary angiography predict the site of a subsequent myocardial infarction in patients with mild-to-moderate coronary artery disease? Circulation. 1988;78(5):1157–66.PubMedCrossRef
35.
Erlinge D, Maehara A, Ben-Yehuda O, Bøtker HE, Maeng M, Kjøller-Hansen L, et al. Identification of vulnerable plaques and patients by intracoronary near-infrared spectroscopy and ultrasound (PROSPECT II): a prospective natural history study. Lancet. 2021;397(10278):985–95.PubMedCrossRef
36.
Gdowski MA, Murthy VL, Doering M, Monroy-Gonzalez AG, Slart R, Brown DL. Association of isolated coronary microvascular dysfunction with mortality and major adverse cardiac events: a systematic review and meta-analysis of aggregate data. J Am Heart Assoc. 2020;9(9): e014954.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
37.
Kelshiker MA, Seligman H, Howard JP, Rahman H, Foley M, Nowbar AN, et al. Coronary flow reserve and cardiovascular outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Heart J. 2022;43(16):1582–93.PubMedCrossRef
38.
The BARI 2D Study Group (2009) A randomized trial of therapies for type 2 diabetes and coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med 360(24):2503–15.
39.
McFalls EO, Ward HB, Moritz TE, Goldman S, Krupski WC, Littooy F, et al. Coronary-artery revascularization before elective major vascular surgery. N Engl J Med. 2004;351(27):2795–804.PubMedCrossRef
40.
Knott KD, Seraphim A, Augusto JB, Xue H, Chacko L, Aung N, et al. The prognostic significance of quantitative myocardial perfusion. Circulation. 2020;141(16):1282–91.PubMedPubMedCentral
41.
Seraphim A, Dowsing B, Rathod KS, Shiwani H, Patel K, Knott KD, et al. Quantitative myocardial perfusion predicts outcomes in patients with prior surgical revascularization. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2022;79(12):1141–51.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
42.
de Winter RW, Jukema RA, van Diemen PA, Schumacher SP, Driessen RS, Stuijfzand WJ, et al. The impact of coronary revascularization on vessel-specific coronary flow capacity and long-term outcomes: a serial [15O]H2O positron emission tomography perfusion imaging study. Eur Heart J - Cardiovasc Imaging. 2022;23(6):743–52.PubMedCrossRef
43.
Johnson NP, Gould KL. Integrating noninvasive absolute flow, coronary flow reserve, and ischemic thresholds into a comprehensive map of physiological severity. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2012;5(4):430–40.PubMedCrossRef
44.
Murthy VL, Lee BC, Sitek A, Naya M, Moody JB, Polavarapu V, et al. Comparison and prognostic validation of multiple methods of quantification of myocardial blood flow with 82Rb PET. J Nucl Med. 2014;55(12):1952–8.PubMedCrossRef
45.
Moody JB, Lee BC, Corbett JR, Ficaro EP, Murthy VL. Precision and accuracy of clinical quantification of myocardial blood flow by dynamic PET: a technical perspective. J Nucl Cardiol. 2015;22(5):935–51.PubMedCrossRef
46.
Lee BC, Moody JB, Weinberg RL, Corbett JR, Ficaro EP, Murthy VL. Optimization of temporal sampling for 82rubidium PET myocardial blood flow quantification. J Nucl Cardiol. 2017;24(5):1517–29.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
47.
Arida-Moody L, Moody JB, Renaud JM, Poitrasson-Rivière A, Hagio T, Smith AM, et al. Effects of two patient-specific dosing protocols on measurement of myocardial blood flow with 3D 82Rb cardiac PET. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2021;12(48):3835–46.CrossRef
48.
Garcia EV, Van Train K, Maddahi J, Prigent F, Friedman J, Areeda J, et al. Quantification of rotational thallium-201 myocardial tomography. J Nucl Med. 1985;26(1):17–26.PubMed
Metadata
Title
Integrated myocardial flow reserve (iMFR) assessment: diffuse atherosclerosis and microvascular dysfunction are more strongly associated with mortality than focally impaired perfusion
Authors
Jonathan B. Moody
Alexis Poitrasson-Rivière
Jennifer M. Renaud
Tomoe Hagio
Mouaz H. Al-Mallah
Richard L. Weinberg
Edward P. Ficaro
Venkatesh L. Murthy
Publication date
03-10-2023
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging / Issue 1/2023
Print ISSN: 1619-7070
Electronic ISSN: 1619-7089
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-023-06448-1

Other articles of this Issue 1/2023

European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging 1/2023 Go to the issue

Editorial

A look into the future: the role of PSMA beyond prostate cancer

Correction

Correction to: EANM’23 Abstract Book Congress Sep 9-13, 2023

Editorial

How to attract young talent to nuclear medicine step 1: a survey conducted by the EANM Oncology and Theranostics Committee to understand the expectations of the next generation

Original Article

Differential privacy preserved federated transfer learning for multi-institutional 68Ga-PET image artefact detection and disentanglement

Editorial

PET/MR in practice: the 3rd Chinese PET/MR Academic Symposium

Original Article

The feasibility of quantitative assessment of dynamic 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET in Takayasu’s arteritis: a pilot study