Evaluation of the ECG based Selvester scoring method to estimate myocardial scar burden and predict clinical outcome in patients with left bundle branch block, with comparison to late gadolinium enhancement CMR imaging.

Published

Journal Article

BACKGROUND: Myocardial scar burden quantification is an emerging clinical parameter for risk stratification of sudden cardiac death and prediction of ventricular arrhythmias in patients with left ventricular dysfunction. We investigated the relationships among semiautomated Selvester score burden and late gadolinium enhancement-cardiovascular magnetic resonance (LGE-CMR) assessed scar burden and clinical outcome in patients with underlying heart failure, left bundle branch block (LBBB) and implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) treatment. METHODS: Selvester QRS scoring was performed on all subjects with ischemic and nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy at Skåne University Hospital Lund (2002-2013) who had undergone LGE-CMR and 12-lead ECG with strict LBBB pre-ICD implantation. RESULTS: Sixty patients were included; 57% nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy and 43% ischemic cardiomyopathy with mean left ventricular ejection fraction of 27.6% ± 11.7. All patients had scar by Selvester scoring. Sixty-two percent had scar by LGE-CMR (n = 37). The Spearman correlation coefficient for LGE-CMR and Selvester score derived scar was r = .35 (p = .007). In scar negative LGE-CMR, there was evidence of scar by Selvester scoring in all patients (range 3%-33%, median 15%). Fourteen patients (23%) had an event during the follow-up period; 11 (18%) deaths and six adequate therapies (10%). There was a moderate trend indicating that presence of scar increased the risk of clinical endpoints in the LGE-CMR analysis (p = .045). CONCLUSION: There is a modest correlation between LGE-CMR and Selvester scoring verified myocardial scar. CMR based scar burden is correlated to clinical outcome, but Selvester scoring is not. The Selvester scoring algorithm needs to be further refined in order to be clinically relevant and reliable for detailed scar evaluation in patients with LBBB.

Full Text

Duke Authors

Cited Authors

  • Chaudhry, U; Platonov, PG; Jablonowski, R; Couderc, J-P; Engblom, H; Xia, X; Wieslander, B; Atwater, BD; Strauss, DG; Van der Pals, J; Ugander, M; Carlsson, M; Borgquist, R

Published Date

  • September 2017

Published In

Volume / Issue

  • 22 / 5

PubMed ID

  • 28248005

Pubmed Central ID

  • 28248005

Electronic International Standard Serial Number (EISSN)

  • 1542-474X

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

  • 10.1111/anec.12440

Language

  • eng

Conference Location

  • United States