Lots of interesting abstracts and cases were submitted for TCTAP 2026. Below are the accepted ones after a thorough review by our official reviewers. Don’t miss the opportunity to expand your knowledge!
ABS20251107_0018
Comprehensive Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Profiling Provides Incremental Prognostic Value Over Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction in ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction
By Yiqing Zhao, Zhenyan Ma, Geng Qian
Presenter
Yiqing Zhao
Authors
Yiqing Zhao1, Zhenyan Ma1, Geng Qian1
Affiliation
People's Liberation Army General Hospital and Medical School, China1
View Study Report
ABS20251107_0018
Non-Invasive Imaging (CTA, MRI, Echo, etc)
Comprehensive Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Profiling Provides Incremental Prognostic Value Over Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction in ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction
Yiqing Zhao1, Zhenyan Ma1, Geng Qian1
People's Liberation Army General Hospital and Medical School, China1
Background
Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) remains a cornerstone for risk stratification in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) but has recognized limitations. Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) comprehensively characterizes myocardial injury, including infarct size, microvascular obstruction (MVO), and intramyocardial hemorrhage (IMH), which are independently associated with major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). The incremental prognostic value of a multi-parametric CMR model integrating these indices with LVEF and left ventricular global longitudinal strain (LVGLS) is not well-defined.
Methods
In a cohort of 674 STEMI patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), CMR was performed within 7 days. Parameters assessed included LVEF, LVGLS, infarct size, MVO, and IMH. The primary endpoint was 5-year MACE, a composite of cardiac death, recurrent myocardial infarction, heart failure rehospitalization, and repeat revascularization. Logistic regression analyzed associations between CMR parameters and MACE. The predictive performance of a comprehensive model was compared against a LVEF-only model using the area under the curve (AUC).
Results
Increased infarct size (odds ratio [OR]=1.16, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.11-1.21, p<0.001), higher LVGLS (OR=1.27, 95% CI: 1.12-1.44, p<0.001), and presence of IMH (OR=2.30, 95% CI: 1.30-4.07, p=0.004) were significant risk factors for MACE, while higher LVEF was protective (OR=0.94, 95% CI: 0.90-0.99, p=0.008). The comprehensive model incorporating LVEF, infarct size, MVO, IMH, and LVGLS demonstrated superior predictive accuracy (AUC=0.940, 95% CI: 0.92-0.95) compared to the LVEF-only model (AUC=0.856, p<0.01). Models combining LVEF with fibrosis indices (AUC=0.935) or LVGLS (AUC=0.888) also outperformed the single-parameter model.
Conclusion
A multi-parametric CMR assessment integrating myocardial fibrosis, LVGLS, and LVEF provides significantly enhanced prognostic value over LVEF alone for STEMI patients post-PCI. This comprehensive approach enables superior risk stratification, facilitating more precise and individualized patient management.