JACC
HOME SUBSCRIPTIONS CURRENT ISSUE PAST ISSUES CARDIOSOURCE SEARCH HELP FEEDBACK
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

J Am Coll Cardiol, 2006; 48:2448-2457, doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2006.07.069 (Published online 28 November 2006).
© 2006 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
j.jacc.2006.07.069v1
48/12/2448    most recent
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (13)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Mahmarian, J. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Mahmarian, J. J.
Related Collections
Right arrowRelated Article

CLINICAL RESEARCH: POST-INFARCTION MYOCARDIAL PERFUSION IMAGING

A Multinational Study to Establish the Value of Early Adenosine Technetium-99m Sestamibi Myocardial Perfusion Imaging in Identifying a Low-Risk Group for Early Hospital Discharge After Acute Myocardial Infarction

John J. Mahmarian, MD, FACC*,1,*, Leslee J. Shaw, PhD{dagger},2, Neil G. Filipchuk, MD{ddagger},3, Habib A. Dakik, MD§, Sherif S. Iskander, MD||,4, Terrence D. Ruddy, MD, Milena J. Henzlova, MD#,4, Felix Keng, MD**, Adel Allam, MD{dagger}{dagger}, Lemuel A. Moyé, MD, PhD{ddagger}{ddagger}, Craig M. Pratt, MD, FACC* for the INSPIRE Investigators

* Methodist DeBakey Heart Center, Department of Cardiology, The Methodist Hospital, Houston, Texas
{dagger} Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California
{ddagger} University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
§ American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon
|| Cardiovascular Associates of East Texas, Tyler, Texas
University of Ottawa Heart Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
# Mount Sinai Medical Center, New York, New York
** National Heart Centre, Singapore, Singapore
{dagger}{dagger} Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt
{ddagger}{ddagger} University of Texas School of Public Health, Houston, Texas.

Manuscript received March 30, 2006; revised manuscript received July 5, 2006, accepted July 6, 2006.

* Reprint requests and correspondence: Dr. John J. Mahmarian, Department of Cardiology, Methodist DeBakey Heart Center, 6550 Fannin Street, SM-677, Houston, Texas 77030. (Email: jmahmarian{at}tmh.tmc.edu).


   Abstract
Top
 Abstract
Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to determine whether gated adenosine Tc-99m sestamibi single-photon emission computed tomography (ADSPECT) could accurately define risk and thereby guide therapeutic decision making in stable survivors of acute myocardial infarction (AMI).

BACKGROUND: Controversy continues as to the role of noninvasive stress imaging in stratifying risk early after AMI.

METHODS: The INSPIRE (Adenosine Sestamibi Post-Infarction Evaluation) trial is a prospective multicenter trial which enrolled 728 clinically stable survivors of AMI who had gated ADSPECT within 10 days of hospital admission and subsequent 1-year follow-up. Event rates were assessed within prospectively defined INSPIRE risk groups based on the adenosine-induced left ventricular perfusion defect size, extent of ischemia, and ejection fraction.

RESULTS: Total cardiac events/death and reinfarction significantly increased within each INSPIRE risk group from low (5.4%, 1.8%), to intermediate (14%, 9.2%), to high (18.6%, 11.6%) (p < 0.01). Event rates at 1 year were lowest in patients with the smallest perfusion defects but progressively increased when defect size exceeded 20% (p < 0.0001). The perfusion results significantly improved risk stratification beyond that provided by clinical and ejection fraction variables. The low-risk INSPIRE group, comprising one-third of all enrolled patients, had a shorter hospital stay with lower associated costs compared with the higher-risk groups (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS: Gated ADSPECT performed early after AMI can accurately identify a sizeable low-risk group who have a <2% death and reinfarction rate at 1 year. Identifying these low-risk patients for early hospital discharge may improve utilization of health care resources at considerable cost savings.

Abbreviations and Acronyms
  ADSPECT = adenosine technetium-99m sestamibi single-photon emission computed tomography
  ACS = acute coronary syndromes
  AMI = acute myocardial infarction
  ANOVA = analysis of variance
  CI = confidence interval
  CR = coronary revascularization
  ETT = exercise treadmill testing
  GLM = general linear modeling
  LVEF = left ventricular ejection fraction
  PDS = perfusion defect size
  RR = relative risk
  SDS = summed difference score
  SRS = summed rest score
  SSS = summed stress score
  TIMI = Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction

There is no consensus as to the optimal strategy for evaluating risk in stable survivors of acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Ideally, this would be a noninvasive method which could be performed safely early after AMI so as to accurately identify low-risk patients and thereby facilitate early hospital discharge. Recent studies in acute coronary syndromes (ACS) propose that a routine invasive approach improves outcome over a conservative strategy of exercise treadmill testing (ETT) followed by selective coronary angiography in patients who demonstrate significant myocardial ischemia (1,2). However, preliminary data in patients after AMI suggest that myocardial perfusion imaging, when combined with a pharmacologic vasodilator such as adenosine, is an attractive noninvasive method for safely and reliably stratifying risk early after admission (3–5). The INSPIRE (Adenosine Sestamibi Post-Infarction Evaluation) is a prospective multinational clinical trial designed to establish the role of quantitative adenosine technetium-99m sestamibi single-photon emission computed tomography (ADSPECT) as the initial primary risk assessment tool for guiding therapeutic decision making in stable survivors of AMI.


   Methods
Top
 Abstract
 Methods
Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Study population.   The study cohort consisted of 728 stabilized patients ≥18 years of age who had either Q- or non–Q-wave AMI and were prospectively enrolled at 16 sites over 36 months (December 1999 through December 2002) with a subsequent 1-year follow-up (6). Study entry criteria are shown in Table 1.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 1. Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria (6)
 
Study design.   The research protocol was approved by each site’s review board, and all patients gave written informed consent. The INSPIRE study design is published (6). The ADSPECT was performed within 10 days of hospital admission using a standard nitrate-enhanced rest-adenosine stress protocol. The nitrate-enhanced rest study was done to maximize detection of ischemia (7). Imaging was performed significantly earlier at U.S. than at non-U.S. sites and irrespective of initial clinical risk defined by the Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) risk score (Fig. 1).


Figure 1
View larger version (49K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
  		Figure 1 Days from hospital admission to adenosine imaging for patients enrolled at United States (USA) versus non-USA sites.

 
Image data were sent electronically to the Nuclear Core Laboratory the day of acquisition for quantification of total and ischemic perfusion defect size (PDS) so as to direct patient management (6). The core laboratory also generated standard semiquantitative summed stress score (SSS), summed rest score (SRS), and summed difference score (SDS) (8). A strong correlation was seen between SSS and total PDS (r = 0.92; p < 0.001; PDS = 3.34 x SSS) and between SDS and ischemic PDS (r = 0.91; p < 0.0001; ischemic PDS = 3.54 x SDS).

INSPIRE risk groups.   Patient risk and subsequent therapeutic decision making were prospectively defined by specific ADSPECT variables (4,5) (Fig. 2). Patients with a small (<20%) PDS were classified as low risk and most had a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of ≥35% (96%) and an ischemic PDS of <10% (97%). This group was discouraged from having coronary angiography unless they developed clinical instability (6). Infarct-free survival at 1 year was anticipated to be >95%, so ADSPECT results were used to expedite hospital discharge (4,5).


Figure 2
View larger version (66K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
  		Figure 2 The INSPIRE study design. IPDS = ischemic perfusion defect size; LVEF = left ventricular ejection fraction; SPECT = single-photon emission computed tomography.

 
Patients with large (≥20%) but primarily nonischemic (<10%) defects were defined as intermediate risk and had catheterization and coronary revascularization (CR) at investigator discretion (5,6). It was anticipated that most would not have CR, because CR does not improve survival over medical therapy in patients without ischemic (9) or viable (10) myocardium.

Patients with large total (≥20%) and ischemic (≥10%) defects and an LVEF of <35% were defined as high risk and encouraged to have coronary angiography, whereas those with an LVEF ≥35% were randomized to receive either intensive medical therapy or CR (6). The results from the randomized arm of the INSPIRE study are reported elsewhere (11). Additional therapeutic considerations are listed in Table 2.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 2. Therapeutic Considerations (6)
 
Cardiac events.   Prospectively defined events were cardiac death, reinfarction, and readmission for ACS or severe congestive heart failure (6). Procedure-related AMIs were identified based on standard clinical criteria rather than by routine surveillance with cardiac enzymes. Events were adjudicated by a blinded end point committee. The Data and Safety Monitoring Board met at prospectively defined intervals to monitor study conduct and event rates within the assigned groups.

Statistical analysis.   The general statistical and cost analysis plans are published (6). Baseline clinical and ADSPECT differences between INSPIRE risk groups were determined using nonparametric methods with chi-squared analysis used to compare all discrete variables except TIMI risk score, where a Spearman correlation was used. Comparisons of continuous measures across INSPIRE risk groups were performed using analysis of variance techniques. Baseline clinical and scintigraphic data are presented as frequency (%) or mean ± standard deviation.

The primary end point was time to first cardiac event with a secondary end point of time to cardiac death/reinfarction (6). The trial had >80% power with a 2-sided type I error of 0.05 to detect differences between INSPIRE risk groups. Risk-adjusted multiple variable Cox proportional hazards modeling estimated the effect of baseline variables on primary and secondary end points. In each case, the proportional hazards assumption was met. The TIMI risk score for ST-segment elevation AMI was selected for comparison with ADSPECT, because it is a well-accepted clinical instrument used to predict outcome in patients who receive thrombolytics (12) and in more heterogeneous AMI populations (13). The TIMI risk score for ACS was not used, because it was derived primarily from patients without AMI (14).

Survival curves compared differences in overall and infarct-free survival among TIMI and INSPIRE risk groups. Other baseline variables assessed by univariate analysis are those in Table 3 (6). Survival curves were also generated based on total and ischemic LVPDS, LVEF, and LV volumes. Unadjusted relative risk ratios were calculated for scintigraphic variables followed by risk-adjusted estimates of cardiac events controlling for the TIMI risk score and LVEF. A final multivariable model included PDS, LVEF, and TIMI risk score. Chi-squared statistic compared a TIMI risk model to one of TIMI risk and LVEF; TIMI risk, LVEF and total PDS; and TIMI risk and all 3 variables.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 3. Overall Baseline Clinical and Scintigraphic Characteristics of the Study Population and Differences Across INSPIRE Risk Groups
 
From the Cox model, predicted 1-year event rates were calculated and compared using analysis of variance (ANOVA) or general linear modeling (GLM). Total and ischemic PDS and LVEF were plotted in relation to predicted event rates. From a Cox model including total and ischemic PDS, event rates from 10% to 75% were calculated for specific total and ischemic PDS values. A final analysis compared predicted event rates from low to high INSPIRE risk groups based on gender, age, and infarct location.

Cost analysis.   Six U.S. sites participated in the cost substudy, and each patient allowed access to their hospital bills. Blinded summary charge reports for the index hospitalization were obtained from each hospital’s finance office and sent to the coordinating center. Total charges were adjusted, using a top-down approach, by multiplying total hospital charges by the hospital-specific cost-charge ratio. This estimated hospital cost was then discounted at a 5% annual rate and inflation-corrected by the U.S. medical service sector estimate of the consumer price index. Cost estimates were available for 205 INSPIRE patients and compared across INSPIRE risk groups using ANOVA or GLM. Nonparametric statistics were used owing to the nonlinearity of cost data, but in every case this analysis was similar to the ANOVA or GLM results.

Total hospital length of stay and time spent in intensive care units were available for all patients. These surrogates for resource intensity and infarct severity were compared across INSPIRE risk groups using GLM techniques adjusting for baseline TIMI risk score.


   Results
Top
 Abstract
 Methods
 Results
Discussion
 References
 
Baseline patient characteristics and differences across INSPIRE risk groups.   Mean patient age for the entire INSPIRE cohort was 63 ± 12 years, 31% were women, and 17% had prior AMI (Table 3). The AMI location was anterior in 32% of patients, and 48% developed Q waves. Mean LVPDS was 26% (with 10% ischemia), and mean LVEF 46 ± 14%. Ischemic PDS was comparably small in low (2.8 ± 3%) and intermediate (3.7 ± 3%) INSPIRE risk groups, but significantly increased in high-risk (23.7 ± 12%) and randomized (21.3 ± 9%) populations (Table 3). Patients were evenly distributed into low (36% vs. 32%), intermediate (28% vs. 30%), high (10% vs. 9%), and randomized (26% vs. 29%) INSPIRE risk groups across U.S. and non-U.S. sites, respectively (p = NS).

Cardiac events.   Over a mean follow-up of 11 ± 3 months, 95 events occurred in 88 patients (12.1%) as follows: cardiac death, sudden (n = 10) or nonsudden (n = 8); nonfatal reinfarction (n = 34); and readmission for ACS (n = 24) or congestive heart failure (n = 12). Patient follow-up was complete at 1 year in 98%. No adenosine- or other procedure-related events occurred.

Coronary angiography, CR, and events.   Few low-risk patients had initial or late invasive procedures (Table 4). In the intermediate-risk group, coronary angiography and CR were performed in 31% and 17% of patients by 1 month, which minimally increased by 1 year. Most high-risk patients had coronary angiography and subsequent CR, generally early after AMI. Coronary revascularization significantly lowered event rates in only the high-risk group (Table 4).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 4. Coronary Angiography, Revascularization, and Events
 
Outcome based on TIMI risk score and clinical variables.   Cardiac event rates significantly increased with increasing TIMI risk score from low (8%) to intermediate (12.5%) to high (22%) (p = 0.042). A similar trend was observed when analysis was limited to cardiac death/reinfarction (p = 0.07). Univariate risk predictors for death/reinfarction were age (relative risk [RR] 1.03/year, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01 to 1.06; p = 0.01) and peak troponin I (RR 1.01/U increase, 95% CI 1.0 to 1.01; p < 0.0001), and for all events they were diabetes mellitus (RR 1.77, 95% CI 1.17 to 2.68; p = 0.006) and peak troponin I (RR = 1.01; 1.0 to 1.01/U increase; p = 0.009).

Outcome based on INSPIRE risk group.   Overall cardiac (p = 0.007) (Fig. 3A) and death/reinfarction (p = 0.009) (Fig. 3B) event rates significantly increased across INSPIRE risk groups from low (5.4% and 1.8%) to intermediate (14.0% and 9.2%) to high (18.6 and 11.6%), respectively. These differences were observed despite a high initial rate of CR (50%) in the high-risk group. After adjustment for the TIMI risk score, INSPIRE risk categories still predicted total (p = 0.01) and death/reinfarction (p = 0.02) events.


Figure 3
View larger version (22K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
  		Figure 3 Total (A) and cardiac death/reinfarction (B) rates based on INSPIRE risk categories.

 
Outcome based on total and ischemic PDS.   Total and ischemic LV PDS predicted patient outcome both before (Table 5A). and after (Table 5B) adjustment for TIMI risk score and LVEF (Table 5C). Each 10% absolute increment in total or ischemic PDS increased the unadjusted relative risk for any event by 37% and 64%, respectively. The extent of scintigraphic scar also predicted outcome (Tables 5A and 5B), but not after adjustment for LVEF (Table 5C). The complementary prognostic information obtained from total and ischemic PDS are depicted in Figure 4.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 5. Relative Risks for Cardiac Events Based on Gated ADSPECT Variables
 

Figure 4
View larger version (17K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
  		Figure 4 Predicted 1-year total and death/reinfarction event rates (with standard error bars) based on total (A) and ischemic (B) perfusion defect size (PDS) and their combination (C). The isobars in C (range 10% to 75%) depict risk for any event. For a patient with a 30% nonischemic PDS, the predicted event rate is 11% (solid circle), versus 25% if the defect is all ischemic (open circle). LV = left ventricle.

 
Outcome based on LVEF and cardiac volumes.   Relative risk for any event or death/reinfarction significantly increased as LVEF decreased (Table 5A) and irrespective of TIMI risk score (Table 5B). An LVEF ≥50% predicted a low 1-year event rate (5%), which increased to 27% in the 3% of patients with an LVEF <20%.

Left ventricular end-diastolic and end-systolic volumes also predicted events (Tables 5A and 5B) but not after adjustment for LVEF (Table 5C). This is explained by the strong inverse relationship between LVEF and end-diastolic (r = 0.76; p < 0.001) and end-systolic (r = 0.91; p < 0.001) volumes.

Incremental prognostic value of ADSPECT variables beyond TIMI risk score.   The INSPIRE risk assessment significantly increased the baseline TIMI risk score global chi-square statistic from 4.7 to 16.5 (total events) and from 4.2 to 15.7 (death/reinfarction) (both p < 0.001).

The addition of total and ischemic PDS to the combined TIMI risk score and LVEF significantly improved the model for predicting all events, but only total PDS added to the risk model for predicting death/reinfarction (Fig. 5). The global chi-square also significantly increased when PDS was added first to the TIMI risk score before LVEF (p < 0.001).


Figure 5
View larger version (44K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
  		Figure 5 The incremental prognostic value of scintigraphic variables compared with TIMI risk score. Abbreviations as in Figure 2.

 
Multivariate risk predictors.   By stepwise logistic regression, total PDS emerged as the most important independent risk predictor (p < 0.0001), followed by ischemic PDS (p < 0.005) and LVEF (p = 0.05) (Table 6). The only significant predictor of death/reinfarction was total PDS.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 6. Multivariate Predictors of Risk
 
Outcome based on the INSPIRE trial risk among patient subgroups.   The value of ADSPECT was assessed in several clinically relevant and prospectively defined patient subgroups (6) (Fig. 6). Irrespective of patient age, gender, or AMI location, the INSPIRE risk criteria stratified patients in a similar fashion as observed in the overall population. Event rates were consistently low in all patient subgroups that were identified as low risk by ADSPECT.


Figure 6
View larger version (28K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
  		Figure 6 Predicted event rates (95% confidence intervals) in low, intermediate, and high INSPIRE risk groups in selected subpopulations. MI = myocardial infarction. *p < 0.0001 for low risk versus intermediate, high risk; {dagger}p = 0.039 for low risk versus intermediate, high risk.

 
Cost analysis and length of hospital stay.   Low-risk INSPIRE patients spent fewer days in the coronary care unit, were discharged home earlier, and had a better 1-year outcome than those in the higher-risk groups (p < 0.0001) (Table 7). This translated into significantly lower hospital costs in the low-risk group compared with the intermediate- and high-risk INSPIRE groups, where invasive diagnostic and interventional therapeutic procedures were more frequently used.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 7. Cost Analysis and Length of Hospital Stay in the INSPIRE Risk Groups
 

   Discussion
Top
 Abstract
 Methods
 Results
 Discussion
References
 
The INSPIRE study is the largest prospective trial yet completed to use gated ADSPECT for the purpose of stratifying risk and thereby guiding therapeutic decision making in clinically stable patients early after AMI. The INSPIRE cohort alone doubles the current published observational experience with pharmacologic SPECT imaging in the post-AMI arena and allowed for risk stratification within a patient population demographically similar to that seen in other recent trials (13,15,16). The INSPIRE results establish that the commonly measured scintigraphic variables of total and ischemic PDS significantly improve the precision for assessing risk beyond that provided by the TIMI risk score alone or when combined with LVEF. Gated ADSPECT also identified a large group of patients with small and/or minimally ischemic defects, where an initial conservative approach of medical therapy is a reasonable alternative to an invasive evaluation.

Study design features.   The refinements in risk stratification we report are attributable to several unique study design features incorporated in the INSPIRE trial: 1) the imaging protocol used a nitrate-enhanced rest followed by an ADSPECT stress study to optimize image quality and allow accurate quantification of myocardial ischemia and LVEF; 2) online quantitative SPECT analysis through a central core laboratory provided uniform image interpretation; 3) domestic and international investigators were enlisted to ensure enrollment of a large and diverse patient population; 4) the protocol encouraged adherence to specific and currently accepted medical and interventional therapeutic strategies; 5) patient risk was prospectively defined by ADSPECT within days of admission and then verified by a 1-year outcome analysis; and 6) the value of ADSPECT for predicting outcome was analyzed in relation to the TIMI risk score.

ADSPECT for assessing risk and guiding therapeutics.   The cornerstone of risk stratification in stable AMI survivors is to rapidly identify high-risk patients who might benefit from CR and low-risk patients for whom medical therapy and early hospital discharge is appropriate. The INSPIRE study achieved this goal by using perfusion imaging to stratify a heterogeneous post-AMI population into several distinct risk categories.

The most clinically relevant primary observation is that ADSPECT can accurately identify a large low-risk population irrespective of age, gender, site of infarction, or clinical risk. This low-risk group, which represented one-third of all enrolled patients, had small (<20%) perfusion defects, preserved LV function, and minimal (<10%) residual ischemia. Previous studies in patients with chronic coronary artery disease or prior AMI have suggested that CR does not improve outcome beyond medical therapy when there is minimal (<10%) (9) or no (17) provokable ischemia. In support of this, our low-risk group had the lowest rate of CR, the shortest hospital stay, the lowest hospital-related costs, and yet the lowest (1.8%) cumulative death and reinfarction rate at 1 year. In most centers these low-risk patients would typically have undergone coronary angiography followed by percutaneous coronary intervention of any residual coronary stenosis. However, the INSPIRE trial demonstrates that such patients can be medically managed with a quite acceptable low overall event rate and, compared with invasive treatment, at a cost savings approaching 65% (18).

The prospectively defined intermediate-risk group represented an additional 29% of patients who would unlikely benefit from an initial invasive approach and for whom hospital costs could be reduced up to 25% (18). Although this group was anticipated to have a higher event rate than the low-risk group based on their larger total PDS and more severe LV dysfunction (4,5), they had only minimal residual ischemic myocardium to revascularize. It is not surprising that CR did not alter event rates in this group.

The prospectively defined high-risk INSPIRE group had the longest hospital stay, the highest rate of CR, and the highest hospital-related costs but represented only 9% of patients. Patients in this group had the highest 1-year overall event rate (18%), particularly when not revascularized. Other trials also suggest that patients with extensive ischemic viable myocardium and a low LVEF benefit most from CR (10). The cost analysis from the INSPIRE trial highlights the substantial increase in hospital expenses attributable to coronary interventional procedures. Gated ADSPECT can specifically identify high-risk ischemic patients so as to properly allocate health care resources.

Previous studies.   Previous smaller or retrospective observational studies suggest that low- and high-risk groups can be identified using exercise (19–21) or pharmacologic stressor agents (3–5) when combined with perfusion scintigraphy. The Veterans Affairs Non–Q-Wave Infarction Strategies in Hospital trial successfully used planar imaging to risk-stratify patients following non–Q-wave AMI (15,22). The Invasive Versus Conservative Treatment in Unstable Coronary Syndromes trial recently showed that patients with non–Q-wave AMI have a similar outcome whether initially evaluated with an invasive or a conservative approach (23).

In contrast, the FRISC-II (Fragmin and Fast Revascularization During Instability in CAD) (2) and TACTICS (Treat Angina With Aggrastat and Determine Cost of Therapy With Invasive or Conservative Strategy) (1) studies reported superiority of a routine invasive approach over a noninvasive strategy of ETT and selective angiography in patients with ACS. Both are particularly germane to the INSPIRE trial in that they have strongly influenced current practice guidelines; and, within the cardiology community, have expanded the existing widespread use of an invasive approach to now include patients with AMI. These trials chose ETT as the noninvasive testing standard—a suboptimal technique for detecting ischemia (20,21) or predicting risk compared with perfusion imaging (3,20). Furthermore, in the TACTICS study ~40% of all cardiac events occurred in the conservative strategy before the index stress test. The clinical benefit of an early invasive approach in the TACTICS study was based solely on event rate differences within this early critical time period; patient outcome in both groups was comparable beyond 30 days. The TIMI experience in 20,101 patients emphasizes that reinfarction after thrombolytic therapy occurs generally within 3 days of admission (16). Because events recur early after AMI, a "watchful waiting" approach is not clinically acceptable but generally unavoidable when ETT is selected as the stressor modality. By using adenosine in the INSPIRE trial, 54% of patients were imaged safely within 2 days of admission, facilitating very early identification and treatment of high-risk patients.

Study limitations.   We did not track the percentage of eligible patients who were enrolled in the INSPIRE trial. However, based on previous trials, up to 70% of AMI patients are clinically stable and would be good candidates for initial evaluation with ADSPECT (24,25). The TIMI risk score for ST-segment elevation AMI may not be entirely applicable to our population, because not all had ST-segment elevation even though all patients had AMI. Finally, although routine surveillance with cardiac enzymes was not performed after invasive procedures to identify subclinical AMI, it is unlikely that ADSPECT would have predicted such procedure-related events.

Conclusions.   Gated ADSPECT is a safe and accurate initial method for identifying: 1) a very large low-risk group after AMI who can be targeted for medical therapy and early hospital discharge; 2) patients with predominantly scar where initial medical treatment is appropriate; and 3) those with extensive ischemia where intensive medical and/or interventional therapy is warranted. This is a cost-efficient paradigm already embraced in clinical practice for evaluating risk and guiding therapeutic decision making in patients with suspected or known CAD (26). The findings from the INSPIRE trial provide justification for recommending that ADSPECT be incorporated within current practice guidelines as an appropriate initial strategy for risk-stratifying stable survivors of ST-segment elevation AMI who do not undergo primary PCI and the emerging larger group of patients with non–ST-segment elevation AMI.


   Acknowledgments
 
The authors are indebted to Drs. David R. Holmes, Robert P. Giugliano, and Enrique F. Schisterman for their participation on the Data Safety and Monitoring Board; to Drs. Raymond Taillefer, Anthony Fung, Richard Steingart, Michael Freeman, Vincent Robinson, Charles Stone, and Dante Graves for patient recruitment; to Gerald H. Olszewski, Bradley K. Pounds, and Ray Russo for ensuring study completion; to the study coordinators and nuclear technologists; and to Janice S. Preslar and Maria E. Frias for their support.


   Footnotes
 
Funding for INSPIRE was provided by Bristol-Myers Squibb Medical Imaging, Astellas Pharma US, and Schering Plough Research Institute.

1 Dr. Mahmarian is on the Advisory Board for CV Therapeutics and Astellas Pharma US. Back

2 Dr. Shaw has received research grants for the END and COURAGE trials Back

3 Dr. Filipchuk received research grants for the DIAD, CCORD, and AMISCAN studies Back

4 Drs. Iskander and Henzlova are on the Speakers’ Bureau for Bristol-Myers Squibb. Back


   References
Top
 Abstract
 Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 

  1. Cannon CP, Weintraub WS, Demopoulos LA, et al. Comparison of early invasive and conservative strategies in patients with unstable coronary syndromes treated with the glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor tirofiban N Engl J Med 2001;344:1879-1887.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  2. Fragmin and Fast Revascularisation During Instability in Coronary Artery Disease (FRISC II) Investigators Invasive compared with noninvasive treatment in unstable coronary-artery disease Lancet 1999;354:708-715.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  3. Brown KA, Heller GV, Landin RS, et al. Early dipyridamole 99mTc-sestamibi single photon emission computed tomographic imaging 2 to 4 days after acute myocardial infarction predicts in-hospital and postdischarge cardiac events: comparison with submaximal exercise imaging Circulation 1999;100:2060-2066.
  4. Mahmarian JJ, Mahmarian AC, Marks GF, Pratt CM, Verani MS. Role of adenosine thallium-201 tomography for defining long-term risk in patients after acute myocardial infarction J Am Coll Cardiol 1995;25:1333-1340.[Abstract]
  5. Dakik HA, Wendt JA, Kimball K, Pratt CM, Mahmarian JJ. Prognostic value of adenosine Tl-201 myocardial perfusion imaging after acute myocardial infarction: results of a prospective clinical trial J Nucl Cardiol 2005;12:276-283.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  6. Mahmarian JJ, Shaw LJ, Olszewski GH, et al. Adenosine Sestamibi SPECT Post-Infarction Evaluation (INSPIRE) trial: a randomized, prospective multicenter trial evaluating the role of adenosine Tc-99m sestamibi SPECT for assessing risk and therapeutic outcomes in survivors of acute myocardial infarction J Nucl Cardiol 2004;11:458-469.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  7. Sciagra R, Bisi G, Santoro GM, et al. Comparison of baseline-nitrate technetium-99m sestamibi with rest-redistribution thallium-201 tomography in detecting viable hibernating myocardium and predicting postrevascularization recovery J Am Coll Cardiol 1997;30:384-391.[Abstract]
  8. Berman DS, Abidov A, Kang X, et al. Prognostic validation of a 17-segment score derived from a 20-segment score for myocardial perfusion SPECT interpretation J Nucl Cardiol 2004;11:414-423.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  9. Hachamovitch R, Hayes SW, Friedman JD, Cohen I, Berman DS. Comparison of the short-term survival benefit associated with revascularization compared with medical therapy in patients with no prior coronary artery disease undergoing stress myocardial perfusion single photon emission computed tomography Circulation 2003;107:2900-2907.
  10. Allman KC, Shaw LJ, Hachamovitch R, Udelson JE. Myocardial viability testing and impact of revascularization on prognosis in patients with coronary artery disease and left ventricular dysfunction: a meta-analysis J Am Coll Cardiol 2002;39:1151-1158.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  11. Mahmarian JJ, Dakik HA, Filipchuk NG, et al. An initial strategy of intensive medical therapy is comparable to that of coronary revascularization for suppression of scintigraphic ischemia in high risk but stable survivors of acute myocardial infarction J Am Coll Cardiol 2006;48:2458-2467.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  12. Morrow DA, Antman EM, Charlesworth A, et al. TIMI risk score for ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a convenient, bedside, clinical score for risk assessment at presentation Circulation 2000;102:2031-2037.
  13. Morrow DA, Antman EM, Parsons L, et al. Application of the TIMI risk score for ST-elevation MI in the National Registry of Myocardial Infarction 3 JAMA 2001;286:1356-1359.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  14. Antman EM, Cohen M, Bernink PJLM, et al. The TIMI risk score for unstable angina/nonST elevation MI: a method for prognostication and therapeutic decision making JAMA 2000;284:835-842.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  15. Boden WE, O’Rourke RA, Crawford MH, et al. : Outcomes in patients with acute nonQ-wave myocardial infarction randomly assigned to an invasive as compared with a conservative management strategy N Engl J Med 1998;338:1785-1792.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  16. Gibson CM, Karha J, Murphy SA, et al. Early and long-term clinical outcomes associated with reinfarction following fibrinolytic administration in the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction trials J Am Coll Cardiol 2003;42:7-16.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  17. Ellis SG, Mooney MR, George BS, et al. Randomized trial of late elective angioplasty versus conservative management for patients with residual stenoses after thrombolytic treatment of myocardial infarction Circulation 1992;86:1400-1406.
  18. Mahoney EM, Jurkovitz CT, Chu H, et al. Cost and cost-effectiveness of an early invasive vs conservative strategy for the treatment of unstable angina and nonST-segment elevation myocardial infarction JAMA 2002;288:1851-1858.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  19. Gibson RS, Beller GA, Gheorghiade M, et al. The prevalence and clinical significance of residual myocardial ischemia 2 weeks after uncomplicated nonQ wave infarction: a prospective natural history study Circulation 1986;73:1186-1198.
  20. Travin MI, Dessouki A, Cameron T, Heller GV. Use of exercise technetium-99m sestamibi SPECT imaging to detect residual ischemia and for risk stratification after acute myocardial infarction Am J Cardiol 1995;75:665-669.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  21. Dakik HA, Mahmarian JJ, Kimball KT, Koutelou MG, Medrano R, Verani MS. Prognostic value of exercise thallium-201 tomography in patients treated with thrombolytic therapy during acute myocardial infarction Circulation 1996;94:2735-2742.
  22. Barnett PG, Chen S, Boden WE, et al. Cost-effectiveness of a conservative, ischemia-guided management strategy after nonQ-wave myocardial infarction: results of a randomized trial Circulation 2002;105:680-684.
  23. de Winter RJ, Windhausen F, Cornel JH, et al. Early invasive versus selectively invasive management for acute coronary syndromes N Engl J Med 2005;353:1095-1104.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  24. Committee to Revise the 1999 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction ACC/AHA guidelines for the management of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction J Am Coll Cardiol 2004;44:E1-E211.
  25. Braunwald E, Antman EM, Beasley JW, et al. ACC/AHA 2002 guideline update for the management of patients with unstable angina and nonST-segment elevation myocardial infarction J Am Coll Cardiol 2002;40:1366-1374.[Free Full Text]
  26. Shaw LJ, Hachamovitch R, Berman DS, et al. The economic consequences of available diagnostic and prognostic strategies for the evaluation of stable angina patients: an observational assessment of the value of precatheterization ischemia J Am Coll Cardiol 1999;33:661-669.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Related Article

Noninvasive Risk Stratification After Myocardial Infarction: New Evidence, New Questions
Raymond J. Gibbons and Todd D. Miller
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2006 48: 2468-2470. [Full Text] [PDF]



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Eur Heart JHome page
S. A. Hayat and R. Senior
Myocardial contrast echocardiography in ST elevation myocardial infarction: ready for prime time?
Eur. Heart J., February 1, 2008; 29(3): 299 - 314.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J Am Coll CardiolHome page
J. J. Mahmarian
Computed Tomography Coronary Angiography as an Anatomic Basis for Risk Stratification: Deja Vu or Something New?
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., September 18, 2007; 50(12): 1171 - 1173.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J Am Coll CardiolHome page
R. J. Gibbons, P. A. Araoz, and E. E. Williamson
The Year in Cardiac Imaging
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., September 4, 2007; 50(10): 988 - 1003.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J Am Coll CardiolHome page
J. J. Mahmarian and C. M. Pratt
Reply
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., June 5, 2007; 49(22): 2227 - 2228.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J Am Coll CardiolHome page
J. J. Mahmarian, H. A. Dakik, N. G. Filipchuk, L. J. Shaw, S. S. Iskander, T. D. Ruddy, F. Keng, M. J. Henzlova, A. Allam, L. A. Moye, et al.
An Initial Strategy of Intensive Medical Therapy Is Comparable to That of Coronary Revascularization for Suppression of Scintigraphic Ischemia in High-Risk But Stable Survivors of Acute Myocardial Infarction
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., December 19, 2006; 48(12): 2458 - 2467.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J Am Coll CardiolHome page
R. J. Gibbons and T. D. Miller
Noninvasive Risk Stratification After Myocardial Infarction: New Evidence, New Questions
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., December 19, 2006; 48(12): 2468 - 2470.
[Full Text] [PDF]

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
j.jacc.2006.07.069v1
48/12/2448    most recent
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (13)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Mahmarian, J. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Mahmarian, J. J.
Related Collections
Right arrowRelated Article

HOME SUBSCRIPTIONS CURRENT ISSUE PAST ISSUES CARDIOSOURCE SEARCH HELP FEEDBACK