Vascular inflammation is recognized as the primary trigger of acute coronary syndrome (ACS). However, current noninvasive methods are not capable of accurately detecting coronary inflammation. Epicardial adipose tissue (EAT) and pericoronary adipose tissue (PCAT), in addition to their role as an energy reserve system, have been found to contribute to the development and progression of coronary artery calcification, inflammation, and plaque vulnerability. They also participate in the vascular response during ischemia, sympathetic stimuli, and arrhythmia. As a result, the evaluation of EAT and PCAT using imaging techniques such as computed tomography (CT), cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR), and nuclear imaging has gained significant attention. PCAT-CT attenuation, which measures the average CT attenuation in Hounsfield units (HU) of the adipose tissue, reflects adipocyte differentiation/size and leukocyte infiltration. It is emerging as a marker of tissue inflammation and has shown prognostic value in coronary artery disease (CAD), being associated with plaque development, vulnerability, and rupture. In patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI), an inflammatory pericoronary microenvironment promoted by dysfunctional EAT/PCAT has been demonstrated, and more recently, it has been associated with plaque rupture in non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI). Endothelial dysfunction, known for its detrimental effects on coronary vessels and its association with plaque progression, is bidirectionally linked to PCAT. PCAT modulates the secretory profile of endothelial cells in response to inflammation and also plays a crucial role in regulating vascular tone in the coronary district. Consequently, dysregulated PCAT has been hypothesized to contribute to type 2 myocardial infarction with non-obstructive coronary arteries (MINOCA) and coronary vasculitis. Recently, quantitative measures of EAT derived from coronary CT angiography (CCTA) have been included in artificial intelligence (AI) models for cardiovascular risk stratification. These models have shown incremental utility in predicting major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) compared to plaque characteristics alone. Therefore, the analysis of PCAT and EAT, particularly through PCAT-CT attenuation, appears to be a safe, valuable, and sufficiently specific noninvasive method for accurately identifying coronary inflammation and subsequent high-risk plaque. These findings are supported by biopsy and in vivo evidence. Although speculative, these pieces of evidence open the door for a fascinating new strategy in cardiovascular risk stratification. The incorporation of PCAT and EAT analysis, mainly through PCAT-CT attenuation, could potentially lead to improved risk stratification and guide early targeted primary prevention and intensive secondary prevention in patients at higher risk of cardiac events.

Background—: Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) is a robust tool to evaluate left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), myocardial salvage index, microvascular obstruction, and myocardial hemorrhage in patients with ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction. We evaluated the additional prognostic benefit of a CMR score over standard prognostic stratification with global registry of acute coronary events (GRACE) score and transthoracic echocardiography LVEF measurement. Methods and Results—: Two hundred nine consecutive patients with ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction (age, 61.4±11.4 years; 162 men) underwent transthoracic echocardiography and CMR after succesful primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) were assessed at a mean follow-up of 2.5±1.2 years. MACE occurred in 24 (12%) patients who at baseline showed higher GRACE risk score ( P <0.01), lower LVEF with both transthoracic echocardiography and CMR, lower myocardial salvage index, and higher per-patient myocardial hemorrhage and microvascular obstruction prevalence and amount as compared with patients without MACE ( P <0.01). The best cut-off values of transthoracic echocardiography-LVEF, CMR-LVEF, myocardial salvage index, and microvascular obstruction to predict MACE were 46.7%, 37.5%, 0.4, and 2.6% of left ventricular mass, respectively. Accordingly, a weighted CMR score, including the following 4 variables (CMR-LVEF, myocardial salvage index, microvascular obstruction, and myocardial hemorrhage), with a maximum of 17 points was calculated and included in the multivariable analysis showing that only CMR score (hazard ratio, 1.867 per SD increase [1.311–2.658]; P <0.001) was independently associated with MACE with the highest net reclassification improvement as compared to GRACE score and transthoracic echocardiography-LVEF measurement. Conclusions—: CMR score provides incremental prognostic stratification as compared with GRACE score and transthoracic echocardiography-LVEF and may impact the management of patients with ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction.

Aims: Whether pulmonary artery (PA) dimension and coronary artery calcium (CAC) score, as assessed by chest computed tomography (CT), are associated with myocardial injury in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is not known. The aim of this study was to explore the risk factors for myocardial injury and death and to investigate whether myocardial injury has an independent association with all-cause mortality in patients with COVID-19. Methods and Results: This is a single-centre cohort study including consecutive patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 undergoing chest CT on admission. Myocardial injury was defined as high-sensitivity troponin I >20 ng/L on admission. A total of 332 patients with a median follow-up of 12 days were included. There were 68 (20.5%) deaths; 123 (37%) patients had myocardial injury. PA diameter was higher in patients with myocardial injury compared with patients without myocardial injury [29.0 (25th–75th percentile, 27–32) mm vs. 27.7 (25–30) mm, P < 0.001). PA diameter was independently associated with an increased risk of myocardial injury [adjusted odds ratio 1.10, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02–1.19, P = 0.01] and death [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 1.09, 95% CI 1.02–1.17, P = 0.01]. Compared with patients without myocardial injury, patients with myocardial injury had a lower prevalence of a CAC score of zero (25% vs. 55%, P < 0.001); however, the CAC score did not emerge as a predictor of myocardial injury by multivariable logistic regression. Myocardial injury was independently associated with an increased risk of death by multivariable Cox regression (adjusted HR 2.25, 95% CI 1.27–3.96, P = 0.005). Older age, lower estimated glomerular filtration rate, and lower PaO2/FiO2 ratio on admission were other independent predictors for both myocardial injury and death. Conclusions: An increased PA diameter, as assessed by chest CT, is an independent risk factor for myocardial injury and mortality in patients with COVID-19. Myocardial injury is independently associated with an approximately two-fold increased risk of death.

Stress computed tomography perfusion (Stress-CTP) and computed tomography-derived fractional flow reserve (FFR_CT) are functional techniques that can be added to coronary computed tomography angiography (cCTA) to improve the management of patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD). This retrospective analysis from the PERFECTION study aims to assess the impact of their availability on the management of patients with suspected CAD scheduled for invasive coronary angiography (ICA) and invasive FFR. The management plan was defined as optimal medical therapy (OMT) or revascularization and was recorded for the following strategies: cCTA alone, cCTA+FFR_CT, cCTA+Stress-CTP and cCTA+FFR_CT+Stress-CTP. In 291 prospectively enrolled patients, cCTA+FFR_CT, cCTA+Stress-CTP and cCTA+FFR_CT+Stress-CTP showed a similar rate of reclassification of cCTA findings when FFR_CT and Stress-CTP were added to cCTA. cCTA, cCTA+FFR_CT, cCTA+Stress-CTP and cCTA+FFR_CT+Stress-CTP showed a rate of agreement versus the final therapeutic decision of 63%, 71%, 89%, 84% (cCTA+Stress-CTP and cCTA+FFR_CT+Stress-CTP vs cCTA and cCTA+FFR_CT: p < 0.01), respectively, and a rate of agreement in terms of the vessels to be revascularized of 57%, 64%, 74%, 71% (cCTA+Stress-CTP and cCTA+FFR_CT+Stress-CTP vs cCTA and cCTA+FFR_CT: p < 0.01), respectively, with an effective radiation dose (ED) of 2.9 ± 1.3 mSv, 2.9 ± 1.3 mSv, 5.9 ± 2.7 mSv, and 3.1 ± 2.1 mSv. The addition of FFR_CT and Stress-CTP improved therapeutic decision-making compared to cCTA alone, and a sequential strategy with cCTA+FFR_CT+Stress-CTP represents the best compromise in terms of clinical impact and radiation exposure.