Imaging of Left Ventricular Hypertrophy: a Practical Utility for Differential Diagnosis and Assessment of Disease Severity

2017 ◽  
Vol 19 (8) ◽  
Author(s):  
Toru Kubo ◽  
Hiroaki Kitaoka
Keyword(s):  
Differential Diagnosis ◽  
Left Ventricular Hypertrophy ◽  
Disease Severity ◽  
Ventricular Hypertrophy ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Practical Utility

scholarly journals Comparison between echocardiography and cardiac magnetic resonance for differential diagnosis of left ventricular hypertrophy

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
E Corsi ◽  
G Todiere ◽  
A Barison ◽  
C Grigoratos ◽  
G.D Aquaro
Keyword(s):  
Differential Diagnosis ◽  
Cardiac Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Left Ventricular Hypertrophy ◽  
Cardiac Amyloidosis ◽  
Ventricular Hypertrophy ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Athlete’S Heart ◽  
Kaplan Meier ◽  
Athlete's Heart

Abstract Background Left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) may be due to different causes, ranging from, benign secondary forms (athlete's heart) to severe prognosis cardiomyopathies (i.e. cardiac amyloidosis). Early and accurate differential diagnosis is important to proper patient management. LVH may be detected by echocardiography signs of hypertrophy or other abnormalities often associated to hypertrophic phenotypes. Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) is often used to confirm the initial diagnostic suspicion. On the best of our knowledge, there are no study specifically designed to evaluate the final impact of CMR in changing or confirming the initial diagnostic echocardiographic suspicion. Aim To evaluate the clinical prognostic correlates of CMR in patients with echocardiographic or ECG suspicion of LVH (or cardiomyopathies with hypertrophic phenotype). Methods and results We enrolled 275 pts with echocardiographic evidence of LVH. Using current guidelines, the initial echocardiographic diagnostic suspicion was: hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) in 46.9% of pts; cardiac amyloidosis in 14.5%; hypertensive LVH in 17%; aortic stenosis in 1.5%; athlete's heart in 0.3%; undetermined LVH in 17%. CMR changed the diagnosis in 42% cases: the diagnosis of HCM increased from 44% to 72% of pts; hypertensive and undetermined LVH decreased significantly (respectively to 4% and 5%). Finally, the change in diagnostic suspicion was associated to reclassification of risk of patients: Kaplan-Meier curves demonstrated that HCM and cardiac amyloidosis had worst prognosis than undetermined or hypertensive LVH. Conclusions CMR changed the echocardiographic suspicion in almost half of patients with LVH. This study highlights the indication of CMR in patient with ECG or echocardiographic suspicion of LVH. Kaplan-Meier curves Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None

Standard ECG for differential diagnosis between Anderson-Fabry disease and hypertrophic cardiomyopathy

Heart ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. heartjnl-2020-318271
Author(s):  
Giovanni Vitale ◽  
Raffaello Ditaranto ◽  
Francesca Graziani ◽  
Ilaria Tanini ◽  
Antonia Camporeale ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Differential Diagnosis ◽  
Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy ◽  
Left Ventricular Hypertrophy ◽  
Ventricular Hypertrophy ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
St Depression ◽  
C Statistic ◽  
Pr Interval ◽  
Qrs Duration ◽  
Ecg Score

ObjectivesTo evaluate the role of the ECG in the differential diagnosis between Anderson-Fabry disease (AFD) and hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM).MethodsIn this multicentre retrospective study, 111 AFD patients with left ventricular hypertrophy were compared with 111 patients with HCM, matched for sex, age and maximal wall thickness by propensity score. Independent ECG predictors of AFD were identified by multivariate analysis, and a multiparametric ECG score-based algorithm for differential diagnosis was developed.ResultsShort PR interval, prolonged QRS duration, right bundle branch block (RBBB), R in augmented vector left (aVL) ≥1.1 mV and inferior ST depression independently predicted AFD diagnosis. A point-by-point ECG score was then derived with the following diagnostic performances: c-statistic 0.80 (95% CI 0.74 to 0.86) for discrimination, the Hosmel-Lemeshow χ2 6.14 (p=0.189) for calibration, sensitivity 69%, specificity 84%, positive predictive value 82% and negative predictive value 72%. After bootstrap resampling, the mean optimism was 0.025, and the internal validated c-statistic for the score was 0.78.ConclusionsStandard ECG can help to differentiate AFD from HCM while investigating unexplained left ventricular hypertrophy. Short PR interval, prolonged QRS duration, RBBB, R in aVL ≥1.1 mV and inferior ST depression independently predicted AFD. Their systematic evaluation and the integration in a multiparametric ECG score can support AFD diagnosis.

scholarly journals Radiomic Analysis of Native T1 Mapping Images for Differential Diagnosis of Left Ventricular Hypertrophy Etiologies

2021 ◽  
Vol In Press (In Press) ◽  
Author(s):  
Chenao Zhan ◽  
Dazhong Tang ◽  
Lu Huang ◽  
Yayuan Geng ◽  
Tao Ai ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Differential Diagnosis ◽  
Left Ventricular Hypertrophy ◽  
Diagnostic Performance ◽  
Ventricular Hypertrophy ◽  
T1 Mapping ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Test Dataset ◽  
Mapping Model ◽  
Independent Test ◽  
Independent Test Dataset

Background: The clinical manifestations of amyloid cardiomyopathy (AC) are not specific; therefore, AC is often misdiagnosed as hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) or hypertensive heart disease (HHD). A differential diagnosis of these three conditions is often necessary in the clinical setting. Objectives: To investigate the differential diagnostic performance of radiomic analysis, based on cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) native T1 mapping images for the left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) etiologies. Methods: This retrospective, case-control study was conducted on 91 participants (68 males and 23 females; mean age: 48 ± 13 years), including 22 patients with HHD, 27 patients with AC, 28 patients with HCM, and 14 controls in Tongji Hospital (Shanghai, China). All participants underwent 3.0T CMR imaging. Besides, radiomic analyses were performed using T1 mapping images. The cases were divided into training and test datasets using a random seed. Next, the models were constructed with the training dataset and evaluated with the test dataset. Results: A total of 1,033 radiomic features were extracted in this study. Overall, 11, 28, 19, and eight features were selected to construct the basal T1 mapping, mid-chamber T1 mapping, apical T1 mapping, and multi-module conjoint models, respectively. Optimal performance was reported in the mid-chamber and basal T1 mapping models. The area under the curve (AUC), precision, recall, and F1 score were 0.96, 0.84, 0.82, and 0.83 for the mid-chamber T1 mapping model and 0.96, 0.90, 0.89, and 0.88 for the basal T1 mapping model in the independent test dataset, respectively. The lowest diagnostic performance was observed in the apical T1 mapping model. The AUC, precision, recall, and F1 score of the apical T1 mapping model were 0.86, 0.71, 0.70, and 0.70 in the independent test dataset, respectively. Conclusions: The radiomic analysis of T1 mapping could accurately distinguish the three causes of myocardial hypertrophy, including HCM, HHD, and AC. It may be also a suitable alternative to late gadolinium enhancement-CMR.

Left Ventricular Hypertrophy

2014 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 11-15
Author(s):  
Steven L. Demeter
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Left Ventricular Hypertrophy ◽  
Ventricular Hypertrophy ◽  
Left Ventricular Mass Index ◽  
Medical Science ◽  
Careful Analysis ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Hypertensive Disease ◽  
Accurate Analysis ◽  
Clear Explanation

Abstract The fourth, fifth, and sixth editions of the AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides) use left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) as a variable to determine impairment caused by hypertensive disease. The issue of LVH, as assessed echocardiographically, is a prime example of medical science being at odds with legal jurisprudence. Some legislatures have allowed any cause of LVH in a hypertensive individual to be an allowed manifestation of hypertensive changes. This situation has arisen because a physician can never say that no component of LVH was not caused by the hypertension, even in an individual with a cardiomyopathy or valvular disorder. This article recommends that evaluators consider three points: if the cause of the LVH is hypertension, is the examinee at maximum medical improvement; is the LVH caused by hypertension or another factor; and, if apportionment is allowed, then a careful analysis of the risk factors for other disorders associated with LVH is necessary. The left ventricular mass index should be present in the echocardiogram report and can guide the interpretation of the alleged LVH; if not present, it should be requested because it facilitates a more accurate analysis. Further, if the cause of the LVH is more likely independent of the hypertension, then careful reasoning and an explanation should be included in the impairment report. If hypertension is only a partial cause, a reasoned analysis and clear explanation of the apportionment are required.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document