Statistical Methods to Support Difficult Diagnoses.

Far too often, one meets patients who went for years or even decades from doctor to doctor without obtaining a valid diagnosis. This brings pain to millions of patients and their families, not to speak of the enormous costs. Often patients cannot tell precisely enough which factors (or combinations thereof) trigger their problems. If conventional methods fail, we propose the use of statistics and algebra to provide doctors much more useful inputs from patients. We use statistical regression for triggering factors of medical problems, and in particular, "balanced incomplete block designs" for factors detection. These methods can supply doctors with much more valuable inputs and can also find combinations of multiple factors through very few tests. In order to show that these methods do work, we briefly describe a case in which these methods helped to solve a 60-year-old problem in a patient and provide some more examples where these methods might be particularly useful. As a conclusion, while regression is used in clinical medicine, it seems to be widely unknown in diagnosing. Statistics and algebra can save the health systems much money, as well as the patients a lot of pain.

Increased KCNJ18 promoter activity as a mechanism in atypical normokalemic periodic paralysis.

OBJECTIVE: To identify the genetic basis of a patient with symptoms of normokalemic sporadic periodic paralysis (PP) and to study the effect of KCNJ18 mutations. METHODS: A candidate gene approach was used to identify causative gene mutations, using Sanger sequencing. KCNJ18 promoter activity was analyzed in transfected HEK293 cells with a luciferase assay, and functional analysis of Kir2.6 channels was performed with the two-electrode voltage-clamp technique. RESULTS: Although we did not identify harmful mutations in SCN4A, CACNA1S, KCNJ2 and KCNE3, we detected a monoallelic four-fold variant in KCNJ18 (R39Q/R40H/A56E/I249V), together with a variant in the respective promoter of this channel (c.-542T/A). The exonic variants in Kir2.6 did not alter the channel function; however, luciferase assays revealed a 10-fold higher promoter activity of the c.-542A promoter construct, which is likely to cause a gain-of-function by increased expression of Kir2.6. We found that reducing extracellular K+ levels causes a paradoxical reduction in outward currents, similar to that described for other inward rectifying K+ channels. Thus, reducing the extracellular K+ levels might be a therapeutic strategy to antagonize the transcriptionally increased KCNJ18 currents. Consistently, treatment of the patient with K+ reducing drugs dramatically improved the health situation and prevented PP attacks. CONCLUSIONS: We show that a promoter defect in the KCNJ18 gene is likely to cause periodic paralysis, as the observed transcriptional upregulation will be linked to increased Kir2.6 function. This concept is further supported by our observation that most of the PP attacks in our patient disappeared on medical treatment with K+ reducing drugs.

Representation of cardiovascular magnetic resonance in the AHA / ACC guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Whereas evidence supporting the diagnostic value of cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) has increased, there exists significant worldwide variability in the clinical utilization of CMR. A recent study demonstrated that CMR is represented in the majority of European Society for Cardiology (ESC) guidelines, with a large number of specific recommendations in particular regarding coronary artery disease. To further investigate the gap between the evidence and clinical use of CMR, this study analyzed the role of CMR in the guidelines of the American College of Cardiology (ACC) and American Heart Association (AHA). METHODS: Twenty-four AHA/ACC original guidelines, updates and new editions, published between 2006 and 2017, were screened for the terms "magnetic", "MRI", "CMR", "MR" and "imaging". Non-cardiovascular MR examinations were excluded. All CMR-related paragraphs and specific recommendations for CMR including the level of evidence (A, B, C) and the class of recommendation (I, IIa, IIb, III) were extracted. RESULTS: Twelve of the 24 guidelines (50.0%) contain specific recommendations regarding CMR. Four guidelines (16.7%) mention CMR in the text only, and 8 (33.3%) do not mention CMR. The 12 guidelines with recommendations for CMR contain in total 65 specific recommendations (31 class-I, 23 class-IIa, 6 class-IIb, 5 class-III). Most recommendations have evidence level C (44/65; 67.7%), followed by level B (21/65; 32.3%). There are no level A recommendations. 22/65 recommendations refer to vascular imaging, 17 to congenital heart disease, 8 to cardiomyopathies, 8 to myocardial stress testing, 5 to left and right ventricular function, 3 to viability, and 2 to valvular heart disease. CONCLUSIONS: CMR is represented in two thirds of the AHA/ACC guidelines, which contain a number of specific recommendations for the use of CMR. In a simplified comparison with the ESC guidelines, CMR is less represented in the AHA/ACC guidelines in particular in the field of coronary artery disease.

Cost-minimization analysis of three decision strategies for cardiac revascularization: results of the "suspected CAD" cohort of the european cardiovascular magnetic resonance registry.

BACKGROUND: Coronary artery disease (CAD) continues to be one of the top public health burden. Perfusion cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) is generally accepted to detect CAD, while data on its cost effectiveness are scarce. Therefore, the goal of the study was to compare the costs of a CMR-guided strategy vs two invasive strategies in a large CMR registry. METHODS: In 3'647 patients with suspected CAD of the EuroCMR-registry (59 centers/18 countries) costs were calculated for diagnostic examinations (CMR, X-ray coronary angiography (CXA) with/without FFR), revascularizations, and complications during a 1-year follow-up. Patients with ischemia-positive CMR underwent an invasive CXA and revascularization at the discretion of the treating physician (=CMR + CXA-strategy). In the hypothetical invasive arm, costs were calculated for an initial CXA and a FFR in vessels with ≥50% stenoses (=CXA + FFR-strategy) and the same proportion of revascularizations and complications were applied as in the CMR + CXA-strategy. In the CXA-only strategy, costs included those for CXA and for revascularizations of all ≥50% stenoses. To calculate the proportion of patients with ≥50% stenoses, the stenosis-FFR relationship from the literature was used. Costs of the three strategies were determined based on a third payer perspective in 4 healthcare systems. RESULTS: Revascularizations were performed in 6.2%, 4.5%, and 12.9% of all patients, patients with atypical chest pain (n = 1'786), and typical angina (n = 582), respectively; whereas complications (=all-cause death and non-fatal infarction) occurred in 1.3%, 1.1%, and 1.5%, respectively. The CMR + CXA-strategy reduced costs by 14%, 34%, 27%, and 24% in the German, UK, Swiss, and US context, respectively, when compared to the CXA + FFR-strategy; and by 59%, 52%, 61% and 71%, respectively, versus the CXA-only strategy. In patients with typical angina, cost savings by CMR + CXA vs CXA + FFR were minimal in the German (2.3%), intermediate in the US and Swiss (11.6% and 12.8%, respectively), and remained substantial in the UK (18.9%) systems. Sensitivity analyses proved the robustness of results. CONCLUSIONS: A CMR + CXA-strategy for patients with suspected CAD provides substantial cost reduction compared to a hypothetical CXA + FFR-strategy in patients with low to intermediate disease prevalence. However, in the subgroup of patients with typical angina, cost savings were only minimal to moderate.

Comparative cost-effectiveness analyses of cardiovascular magnetic resonance and coronary angiography combined with fractional flow reserve for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease.

BACKGROUND: According to recent guidelines, patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) should undergo revascularization if significant myocardial ischemia is present. Both, cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) and fractional flow reserve (FFR) allow for a reliable ischemia assessment and in combination with anatomical information provided by invasive coronary angiography (CXA), such a work-up sets the basis for a decision to revascularize or not. The cost-effectiveness ratio of these two strategies is compared. METHODS: Strategy 1) CMR to assess ischemia followed by CXA in ischemia-positive patients (CMR + CXA), Strategy 2) CXA followed by FFR in angiographically positive stenoses (CXA + FFR). The costs, evaluated from the third party payer perspective in Switzerland, Germany, the United Kingdom (UK), and the United States (US), included public prices of the different outpatient procedures and costs induced by procedural complications and by diagnostic errors. The effectiveness criterion was the correct identification of hemodynamically significant coronary lesion(s) (= significant CAD) complemented by full anatomical information. Test performances were derived from the published literature. Cost-effectiveness ratios for both strategies were compared for hypothetical cohorts with different pretest likelihood of significant CAD. RESULTS: CMR + CXA and CXA + FFR were equally cost-effective at a pretest likelihood of CAD of 62% in Switzerland, 65% in Germany, 83% in the UK, and 82% in the US with costs of CHF 5'794, € 1'517, £ 2'680, and $ 2'179 per patient correctly diagnosed. Below these thresholds, CMR + CXA showed lower costs per patient correctly diagnosed than CXA + FFR. CONCLUSIONS: The CMR + CXA strategy is more cost-effective than CXA + FFR below a CAD prevalence of 62%, 65%, 83%, and 82% for the Swiss, the German, the UK, and the US health care systems, respectively. These findings may help to optimize resource utilization in the diagnosis of CAD.

Quality assessment of cardiovascular magnetic resonance in the setting of the European CMR registry: description and validation of standardized criteria.

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) has become an important diagnostic imaging modality in cardiovascular medicine. However, insufficient image quality may compromise its diagnostic accuracy. We aimed to describe and validate standardized criteria to evaluate a) cine steady-state free precession (SSFP), b) late gadolinium enhancement (LGE), and c) stress first-pass perfusion images. These criteria will serve for quality assessment in the setting of the Euro-CMR registry. METHODS: Thirty-five qualitative criteria were defined (scores 0-3) with lower scores indicating better image quality. In addition, quantitative parameters were measured yielding 2 additional quality criteria, i.e. signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of non-infarcted myocardium (as a measure of correct signal nulling of healthy myocardium) for LGE and % signal increase during contrast medium first-pass for perfusion images. These qualitative and quantitative criteria were assessed in a total of 90 patients (60 patients scanned at our own institution at 1.5T (n=30) and 3T (n=30) and in 30 patients randomly chosen from the Euro-CMR registry examined at 1.5T). Analyses were performed by 2 SCMR level-3 experts, 1 trained study nurse, and 1 trained medical student. RESULTS: The global quality score was 6.7±4.6 (n=90, mean of 4 observers, maximum possible score 64), range 6.4-6.9 (p=0.76 between observers). It ranged from 4.0-4.3 for 1.5T (p=0.96 between observers), from 5.9-6.9 for 3T (p=0.33 between observers), and from 8.6-10.3 for the Euro-CMR cases (p=0.40 between observers). The inter- (n=4) and intra-observer (n=2) agreement for the global quality score, i.e. the percentage of assignments to the same quality tertile ranged from 80% to 88% and from 90% to 98%, respectively. The agreement for the quantitative assessment for LGE images (scores 0-2 for SNR <2, 2-5, >5, respectively) ranged from 78-84% for the entire population, and 70-93% at 1.5T, 64-88% at 3T, and 72-90% for the Euro-CMR cases. The agreement for perfusion images (scores 0-2 for %SI increase >200%, 100%-200%,<100%, respectively) ranged from 81-91% for the entire population, and 76-100% at 1.5T, 67-96% at 3T, and 62-90% for the Euro-CMR registry cases. The intra-class correlation coefficient for the global quality score was 0.83. CONCLUSIONS: The described criteria for the assessment of CMR image quality are robust with a good inter- and intra-observer agreement. Further research is needed to define the impact of image quality on the diagnostic and prognostic yield of CMR studies.

Adenosine-stress cardiac magnetic resonance imaging in suspected coronary artery disease: a net cost analysis and reimbursement implications.

The health and economic implications of new imaging technologies are increasingly relevant policy issues. Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) is currently not or not sufficiently reimbursed in a number of countries including Germany, presumably because of a limited evidence base. It is unknown, however, whether it can be effectively used to facilitate medical decision-making and reduce costs by serving as a gatekeeper to invasive coronary angiography. We investigated whether the application of CMR in patients suspected of having coronary artery disease (CAD) reduces costs by averting referrals to cardiac catheterization. We used propensity score methods to match 218 patients from a CMR registry to a previously studied cohort in which CMR was demonstrated to reliably identify patients who were low-risk for major cardiac events. Covariates over which patients were matched included comorbidity profiles, demographics, CAD-related symptoms, and CAD risk as measured by Morise scores. We determined the proportion of patients for whom cardiac catheterization was deferred based upon CMR findings. We then calculated the economic effects of practice pattern changes using data on cardiac catheterization and CMR costs. CMR reduced the utilization of cardiac catheterization by 62.4%. Based on estimated catheterization costs of € 619, the utilization of CMR as a gatekeeper reduced per-patient costs by a mean of € 90. Savings were realized until CMR costs exceeded € 386. Cost savings were greatest for patients at low-risk for CAD, as measured by baseline Morise scores, but were present for all Morise subgroups with the exception of patients at the highest risk of CAD. CMR significantly reduces the utilization of cardiac catheterization in patients suspected of having CAD. Per-patient savings range from € 323 in patients at lowest risk of CAD to € 58 in patients at high-risk but not in the highest risk stratum. Because a negative CMR evaluation has high negative predictive value, its application as a gatekeeper to cardiac catheterization should be further explored as a treatment option.

Negative predictive value of normal adenosine-stress cardiac MRI in the assessment of coronary artery disease and correlation with semiquantitative perfusion analysis.

PURPOSE: To prospectively determine the negative predictive value of normal adenosine stress cardiac MR (CMR) in routine patients referred for evaluation of coronary artery disease (CAD), predominantly with intermediate to high pretest risk. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Consecutive patients referred for coronary angiography were examined in a 1.5 Tesla whole-body scanner before catheterization. A total of 158 patients with normal CMR on qualitative assessment were included, and semiquantitative perfusion analysis was performed. Significant CAD was regarded as luminal narrowing of >or=70% in coronary angiography. RESULTS: In the 158 study patients, negative predictive value of normal adenosine-stress CMR for significant CAD was 96.2% (for stenosis >or=90%: 98.1%). True-negative and false-negative patients were comparable regarding clinical presentation, risk factors, and CMR findings. Semiquantitative perfusion analysis gave significantly prolonged arrival time index and peak time index in the false-negative group. Using cutoff values >1.8 for arrival time index or >1.2 for peak time index, the CMR negative predictive value increased to 98.7% (for stenosis >or=90%: to 100%). CONCLUSION: The very high negative predictive value for CAD supports CMR-based decision making for the indication to coronary angiography. Semiquantitative perfusion analysis seems promising to identify the small group of CAD patients not detectable by qualitative CMR assessment.

Prognostic value of normal adenosine-stress cardiac magnetic resonance imaging.

We investigated the prognostic value of normal adenosine stress cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) in suspected coronary artery disease (CAD). Prospectively enrolled in the study were 218 patients with suspected CAD, no stress hypoperfusion, and no delayed enhancement in CMR, and consecutively deferred coronary angiography. The primary end point was a 12-month rate of major adverse cardiac events (MACE; cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, revascularization, hospitalization due to cardiovascular event). CMR indication was symptomatic angina (Canadian Cardiovascular Society II in 42% and III in 7%) or evaluation of myocardial ischemia in patients with arrhythmia, syncope, and/or equivocal stress tests and cardiovascular risk factors (51%). As the main result, the 12-month MACE rate was 2/218 (1 stent implantation, 1 bypass surgery) and CMR negative predictive value 99.1%. There was no cardiac death or myocardial infarction. In conclusion, normal adenosine stress CMR predicts a very low MACE rate and an excellent 1-year prognosis in patients with suspected CAD. Our results provide clinical reassurance that patients at risk for CAD-associated MACE were not missed by CMR. Hence, CMR may serve as a reliable noninvasive gatekeeper to reduce the number of redundant coronary angiographies.

Angiographic correlations of patients with small vessel disease diagnosed by adenosine-stress cardiac magnetic resonance imaging.

Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) with adenosine-stress myocardial perfusion is gaining importance for the detection and quantification of coronary artery disease (CAD). However, there is little knowledge about patients with CMR-detected ischemia, but having no relevant stenosis as seen on coronary angiography (CA). The aims of our study were to characterize these patients by CMR and CA and evaluate correlations and potential reasons for the ischemic findings. 73 patients with an indication for CA were first scanned on a 1.5T whole-body CMR-scanner including adenosine-stress first-pass perfusion. The images were analyzed by two independent investigators for myocardial perfusion which was classified as subendocardial ischemia (n = 22), no perfusion deficit (n = 27, control 1), or more than subendocardial ischemia (n = 24, control 2). All patients underwent CA, and a highly significant correlation between the classification of CMR perfusion deficit and the degree of coronary luminal narrowing was found. For quantification of coronary blood flow, corrected Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) frame count (TFC) was evaluated for the left anterior descending (LAD), circumflex (LCX) and right coronary artery (RCA). The main result was that corrected TFC in all coronaries was significantly increased in study patients compared to both control 1 and to control 2 patients. Study patients had hypertension or diabetes more often than control 1 patients. In conclusion, patients with CMR detected subendocardial ischemia have prolonged coronary blood flow. In connection with normal resting flow values in CAD, this supports the hypothesis of underlying coronary microvascular impairment. CMR stress perfusion differentiates non-invasively between this entity and relevant CAD.

Clinical implication of adenosine-stress cardiac magnetic resonance imaging as potential gatekeeper prior to invasive examination in patients with AHA/ACC class II indication for coronary angiography.

BACKGROUND: Real world cardiology is faced with a low diagnostic yield of coronary angiography (CXA) in patients presenting with ACC/AHA class II CXA indication. Our aim was to analyze the clinical implication of a Cardiac MR (CMR) protocol including adenosine stress perfusion in this patient population. We examined whether CMR could enhance appropriate CXA indication and thus reduce the rate of pure diagnostic CXA. In addition, we compared the relative impact of CMR exam components (perfusion, function and viability assessment) in achieving this target. METHODS: 176 patients were referred for CXA with class II indication. 171 underwent complete additional CMR exam in a 1.5-T whole body CMR-scanner for myocardial function, ischemia and viability prior to CXA. The routine protocol for assessment of CAD consisted of functional imaging (long and short axes), adenosine stress- and rest-perfusion in short axis orientation and "late enhancement" imaging in long and short axes. Images were analyzed by two independent and blinded investigators. Interobserver differences were resolved by a third reader. RESULTS: There was a high association between CMR results and subsequent invasive findings (chi square for CMR perfusion deficit and stenosis >70% in CXA: 113.7, p<0.0001). 109 (63.7%) of our patients had relevant perfusion deficits as seen by CMR and matching coronary artery stenosis >70%. Four (2.3%) patients had false negative CMR findings. In 58 patients (33.9%) no relevant coronary artery stenosis could be observed, correctly predicted by CMR in 48 cases; in 10 (5.8%) patients CMR provided false positive results. Sensitivity of CMR to detect relevant CAD (>70% luminal narrowing) was 0.96, specificity 0.83, positive predictive value 0.92 and negative predictive value 0.92. Of the CMR components, perfusion deficit was the strongest independent predictor (odds ratio 132.3, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: In a great number of patients being referred to cath lab with ACC/AHA class II indication for CXA, CMR provides a high accuracy for decision making regarding appropriateness of the invasive exam. CMR prior to CXA could substantially reduce pure diagnostic coronary angiographies in patients with intermediate probability for CAD, in our patient-cohort from approximately 34% to 6%. Further studies are warranted to identify rare false negative CMR results.