MR-IMPACT II: Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Myocardial Perfusion Assessment in Coronary artery disease Trial: perfusion-cardiac magnetic resonance vs. single-photon emission computed tomography for the detection of coronary artery disease: a comparative multicentre, multivendor trial.

Aims Perfusion-cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) has emerged as a potential alternative to single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) to assess myocardial ischaemia non-invasively. The goal was to compare the diagnostic performance of perfusion-CMR and SPECT for the detection of coronary artery disease (CAD) using conventional X-ray coronary angiography (CXA) as the reference standard. Methods and results In this multivendor trial, 533 patients, eligible for CXA or SPECT, were enrolled in 33 centres (USA and Europe) with 515 patients receiving MR contrast medium. Single-photon emission computed tomography and CXA were performed within 4 weeks before or after CMR in all patients. The prevalence of CAD in the sample was 49%. Drop-out rates for CMR and SPECT were 5.6 and 3.7%, respectively (P = 0.21). The primary endpoint was non-inferiority of CMR vs. SPECT for both sensitivity and specificity for the detection of CAD. Readers were blinded vs. clinical data, CXA, and imaging results. As a secondary endpoint, the safety profile of the CMR examination was evaluated. For CMR and SPECT, the sensitivity scores were 0.67 and 0.59, respectively, with the lower confidence level for the difference of +0.02, indicating superiority of CMR over SPECT. The specificity scores for CMR and SPECT were 0.61 and 0.72, respectively (lower confidence level for the difference: -0.17), indicating inferiority of CMR vs. SPECT. No severe adverse events occurred in the 515 patients. Conclusion In this large multicentre, multivendor study, the sensitivity of perfusion-CMR to detect CAD was superior to SPECT, while its specificity was inferior to SPECT. Cardiac magnetic resonance is a safe alternative to SPECT to detect perfusion deficits in CAD.

Anàlisi factorial confirmatòria per a variables categòriques: Aplicació al qüestionari de discapacitat WHODAS-II

Objective: To describe the methodology of Confirmatory Factor Analyis for categorical items and to apply this methodology to evaluate the factor structure and invariance of the WHO-Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS-II) questionnaire, developed by the World HealthOrganization.Methods: Data used for the analysis come from the European Study of Mental Disorders(ESEMeD), a cross-sectional interview to a representative sample of the general population of 6 european countries (n=8796). Respondents were administered a modified version of theWHODAS-II, that measures functional disability in the previous 30 days in 6 differentdimensions: Understanding and Communicating; Self-Care, Getting Around, Getting Along withOthers, Life Activities and Participation. The questionnaire includes two types of items: 22severity items (5 points likert) and 8 frequency items (continuous). An Exploratory factoranalysis (EFA) with promax rotation was conducted on a random 50% of the sample. Theremaining half of the sample was used to perform a Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) inorder to compare three different models: (a) the model suggested by the results obtained in theEFA; (b) the theoretical model suggested by the WHO with 6 dimensions; (c) a reduced modelequivalent to model b where 4 of the frequency items are excluded. Moreover, a second orderfactor was also evaluated. Finally, a CFA with covariates was estimated in order to evaluatemeasurement invariance of the items between Mediterranean and non-mediterranean countries.Results: The solution that provided better results in the EFA was that containing 7 factors. Twoof the frequency items presented high factor loadings in the same factor, and one of thempresented factor loadings smaller than 0.3 with all the factors. With regard to the CFA, thereduced model (model c) presented the best goodness of fit results (CFI=0.992,TLI=0.996,RMSEA=0.024). The second order factor structure presented adequate goodness of fit (CFI=0.987,TLI=0.991, RMSEA=0.036). Measurement non-invariance was detected for one of the items of thequestionnaire (FD20 ¿ Embarrassment due to health problems).Conclusions: AFC confirmed the initial hypothesis about the factorial structure of the WHODAS-II in 6factors. The second order factor supports the existence of a global dimension of disability. The use of 4of the frequency items is not recommended in the scoring of the corresponding dimensions.

High prevalence of osteoporosis in Swiss women aged 60 and older: a 2-year pilot screening campaign.

Background: Osteoporosis (OP) is frequent in postmenopausal women, but remains underdiagnosed and undertreated. In Switzerland, DXA is not reimbursed by the insurances for screening, even if it is recommended to test women's Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at the age of 65. Methods: To assess the feasibility of a screening program for OP, the Bone diseases center of Lausanne has been mandated to perform a 2-year information and screening campaign (3 days per months) for women age 60 and older through the state of Vaud using a mobile unit for bone assessment. This project is still ongoing. Women are informed by media for dates and screening locations. Appointments are taken by phone. Women known for osteoporosis or already treated are excluded. During the evaluation every women is assessed by a questionnaire for risk factors, by a DXA measurement (Discovery C, Hololgic), and by Vertebral Fracture Assessment (VFA) for Genant's grades 2 and 3 prevalent vertebral fractures (VF). Women are considered at high risk of fracture if they have a hip fracture, a VF, another fragility fracture with a BMD T-score ≤-2 or a BMD T-score ≤-2.5. Results: After 17 months (50 days of screening), 752 women were assessed, mean age 66±6 yrs, mean BMI 26±5 kg/m2, mean lowest T-score -1.6±1.0 SD. 215 women (29%) were considered at high risk, 92 of them (12%) having established OP and 50 (7%) having one or more fragility VF. VF were unknown for 83% of the women and discovered by VFA. The number needed to screen (NNS) were 3.5 for high risk women, 8.2 for established OP and 15 for VF. Conclusions: After near ¾ of the project, prevalence of women at high risk of fracture was high, with a NNS below 4. Knowing the global cost of OP and that current treatment have a high efficacy for fracture risk reduction, such a screening program could have a positive economic impact. VFA allowed discovering many women with unknown VF, who were at very high risk of further fractures. A systematic screening for VF should be added to BMD measurements after the age of 60.