Safety and diagnostic accuracy of stress cardiac magnetic resonance imaging vs exercise tolerance testing early after acute ST elevation myocardial infarction.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the safety and diagnostic accuracy of adenosine-stress cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) perfusion imaging early after acute ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) compared with standard exercise tolerance testing (ETT).

DESIGN AND SETTING: Cross sectional observational study in a university teaching hospital.

PATIENTS: 35 patients admitted with first acute STEMI.

INTERVENTIONS: All patients underwent a CMR imaging protocol which included rest and adenosine-stress perfusion, viability, and cardiac functional assessment. All patients also had an ETT (modified Bruce protocol) and x ray coronary angiography.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Safety and diagnostic accuracy of adenosine-stress perfusion CMR vs ETT early after STEMI in identifying patients with significant coronary stenosis (>or=70%) and the need for coronary revascularisation. Also, to determine if CMR can distinguish between ischaemia in the peri-infarct zone and ischaemia in remote myocardium.

RESULTS: CMR imaging was well tolerated (all patients completed the protocol) and no complications occurred. CMR was more sensitive (86% vs 48%, p = 0.0074) and more specific than ETT (100% vs 50%, p<0.0001) for detecting significant coronary stenosis, and more sensitive for predicting revascularisation (94% vs 56%, p = 0.039). Inducible ischaemia in the infarct related artery territory was seen in 21 of 35 patients and was associated with smaller infarct size and less transmurality of infarction.

CONCLUSIONS: Adenosine-stress CMR imaging is safe early after acute STEMI and identifies patients with significant coronary stenosis more accurately than ETT.