Diagnostic yield of Electroanatomic voltage mapping in guiding Endomyocardial biopsies; a comparison with an MRI-guided approach

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
M Bergonti ◽  
A Dello Russo ◽  
A Gasperetti ◽  
V Catto ◽  
G Vettor ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cardiac Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Sensitivity And Specificity ◽  
Diagnostic Yield ◽  
Pathological Findings ◽  
Gadolinium Enhancement ◽  
New Methods ◽  
Promising Tool ◽  
Voltage Mapping ◽  
Complications Rate

Abstract Background Electroanatomic voltage mapping (EVM) is a promising modality for guiding Endomyocardial biopsies (EMB). Previous experiences on this techniques have reported safety and feasibility of this approach. These reports however, resulted limited by sample size or imperfect designs, preventing reliable comparisons of the effectiveness of this new methods with a conventional or a cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging guided approach. Aim We now report the largest cohort of patients undergoing EVM-guided EMB in order to show its diagnostic yield and comparing it with a cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) guided approach. Methods One-hundred and sixty-two consecutive patients undergoing EMB at our Institution from 2010 to 2019 were included. Pathological areas identified at EVM and CMR underwent EMB. According to EMB results, CMR and EVM sensitivity and specificity regarding the identification of pathological substrates of myocardium were evaluated. Results A gadolinium-enhanced CMR had been performed in 143 (88.9%) of the population and yielded pathological findings in 121 (85.8%) of such cases. Late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) was present in 94 (70%) of the patients, while EVM identified areas of low voltages in 61%. Right (73%), left (19%) or both ventricles (8%) underwent sampling. EVM proved to have similar sensitivity to CMR (74% vs. 77%; P=0.479), with non-significantly higher specificity (70% vs. 47% P=0.738). In 12 patients with EMB-proven cardiomyopathy, EVM identified pathological areas, which had been undetected at CMR evaluation (concordance rate 53.8%; k = 0.26). Sensitivity of pooled EVM and CMR was as high as 95%. Five cases (3,8%) of cardiomyopathies were undetected by both CMR and EVM. Complications rate was low (4,9%), mostly vascular access related, with no patients requiring urgent management. Conclusion EVM proved to be a promising tool for targeted-EMB due to its sensitivity and specificity in identifying myocardial pathological substrates. EVM demonstrated to have an accuracy similar to CMR. EVM and CMR together conferred EMB a positive predictive value of 89%. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None

scholarly journals Diagnostic Yield of Electroanatomic Voltage Mapping in Guiding Endomyocardial Biopsies

Circulation ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 142 (13) ◽  
pp. 1249-1260 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michela Casella ◽  
Antonio Dello Russo ◽  
Marco Bergonti ◽  
Valentina Catto ◽  
Edoardo Conte ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cardiac Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Sensitivity And Specificity ◽  
Low Voltage ◽  
Diagnostic Yield ◽  
Gadolinium Enhancement ◽  
Promising Tool ◽  
Voltage Mapping ◽  
Few Data ◽  
New Diagnosis ◽  
Complications Rate

Background: Electroanatomic voltage mapping (EVM) is a promising modality for guiding endomyocardial biopsies (EMBs). However, few data support its feasibility and safety. We now report the largest cohort of patients undergoing EVM-guided EMBs to show its diagnostic yield and to compare it with a cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR)–guided approach. Methods: We included 162 consecutive patients undergoing EMB at our institution from 2010 to 2019. EMB was performed in pathological areas identified at EVM and CMR. CMR and EVM sensitivity and specificity regarding the identification of pathological substrates of myocardium were evaluated according to EMB results. Results: Preoperative CMR showed late gadolinium enhancement in 70% of the patients, whereas EVM identified areas of low voltage in 61%. Right (73%), left (19%), or both ventricles (8%) underwent sampling. EVM proved to have sensitivity similar to CMR (74% versus 77%), with specificity being 70% and 47%, respectively. In 12 patients with EMB-proven cardiomyopathy, EVM identified pathological areas that had been undetected at CMR evaluation. Sensitivity of pooled EVM and CMR was as high as 95%. EMB analysis allowed us to reach a new diagnosis, different from the suspected clinical diagnosis, in 39% of patients. The complications rate was low, mostly related to vascular access, with no patients requiring urgent management. Conclusions: EVM proved to be a promising tool for targeted EMB because of its sensitivity and specificity for identification of myocardial pathological substrates. EVM was demonstrated to have accuracy similar to CMR. EVM and CMR together conferred a positive predictive value of 89% on EMB.

scholarly journals POS0886 COULD BE INTERSTITIAL MYOCARDITIS A FEATURE OF THE ANTISYNTHETASE SYNDROME?

2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 699.1-699
Author(s):  
A. Gil-Vila ◽  
G. Burcet ◽  
A. Anton-Vicente ◽  
D. Gonzalez-Sans ◽  
A. Nuñez-Conde ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cardiac Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Late Gadolinium Enhancement ◽  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Interstitial Lung Disease ◽  
Cardiac Involvement ◽  
T2 Mapping ◽  
Extracellular Volume ◽  
Interstitial Tissue ◽  
Antisynthetase Syndrome ◽  
Gadolinium Enhancement

Background:Antisynthetase syndrome (ASS) is characterized by inflammatory myopathy, interstitial lung disease, arthritis, mechanical hands and Raynaud phenomenon, among other features. Recent studies have shown that idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIM) may develop cardiac involvement, either ischemic (coronary artery disease) or inflammatory (myocarditis). We wonder if characteristic lung interstitial involvement (interstitial lung disease) that appears in patients with the ASS may also affect the myocardial interstitial tissue. New magnetic resonance mapping techniques could detect subclinical myocardial involvement, mainly as edema (increase extracellular volume in interstitium and extracellular matrix), even in the absence of visible late Gadolinium enhancement (LGE).Objectives:Our aim was to describe the presence of interstitial myocarditis in a group of patients with ASS.Methods:Cross-sectional, observational study performed in a tertiary care center. We included 13 patients diagnosed with ASS (7 male, 53%, mean (SD) age at diagnosis 56,8 years (±11,8)). The patients were consecutively selected from our outpatient myositis clinic. Myositis specific and associated antibodies were performed by means of line immunoblot (EUROIMMUN©). Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) was performed on all patients. The study protocol includes functional cine magnetic resonance and standard late gadolinium enhancement (LGE), as well as novel parametric T1 and T2 mapping sequences (modified look locker inversion recovery sequences - MOLLI) with extracellular volume (ECV) calculation 20 minutes after the injection of a gadolinium-based contrast material.Results:CMR could not be performed in one patient due to anxiety. All patients studied (12) had a normal biventricular function, without alteration of segmental contraction. A third (4 out of 12, 33%) of the studied patients showed elevated T2 myocardial values without focal LGE, half of them (2/4) with an elevated ECV, consistent with myocardial edema. Two patients with normal T2 values showed unspecific LGE focal patterns, one in the right ventricle union points and another with mild interventricular septum enhancement (Figure 1). None of the patients studied refer any cardiac symptomatology. All the four patients with T2 mapping alterations (100%) had interstitial lung involvement, but only 4 out of 8 (50%) of the rest ASS patients without T2 mapping positivity. The autoimmune profile was as follows: 10 anti-Jo1/Ro52, 1 anti-EJ/Ro52, 2 anti-PL12.Conclusion:Myocarditis, although subclinical, appears to be a feature in ASS patients. T1 and T2 mapping sequences might be valuable to detect and monitor subclinical cardiac involvement in these patients. The possibility that the same etiopathogenic mechanism may be involved in the interstitial tissue in lung and myocardium is raised. More studies must be done in order to assert the prevalence of myocarditis in ASS.References:[1]Dieval C et al. Myocarditis in Patients With Antisynthetase Syndrome: Prevalence, Presentation, and Outcomes. Medicine (Baltimore). 2015 Jul;94(26):e798.[2]Myhr KA, Pecini R. Management of Myocarditis in Myositis: Diagnosis and Treatment. Curr Rheumatol Rep. 2020 Jul 22; 22:49.[3]Sharma K, Orbai AM, Desai D, Cingolani OH, Halushka MK, Christopher-Stine L, Mammen AL, Wu KC, Zakaria S. Brief report: antisynthetase syndrome-associated myocarditis. J Card Fail. 2014 Dec;20(12):939-45.Figure 1.Cardiac magnetic resonance images from ASS patients.Disclosure of Interests:None declared

scholarly journals Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging in differential diagnosis of cardiac masses

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
EC D"angelo ◽  
P Paolisso ◽  
L Bergamaschi ◽  
A Foa ◽  
I Magnani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Differential Diagnosis ◽  
Cardiac Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Pericardial Effusion ◽  
Tissue Characterization ◽  
Descriptive Analysis ◽  
Gadolinium Enhancement ◽  
Malignant Lesions ◽  
T1 And T2 ◽  
Cardiac Masses

Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: Public hospital(s). Main funding source(s): S. Orsola Hospital Background  Differential diagnosis of cardiac masses represents a challenging issue with important implications for therapeutic management and patient’s prognosis. Cardiac Magnetic Resonance (CMR) is a non-invasive imaging technique used to characterize morphologic and functional features of masses. Integration of these information can lead an accurate diagnosis. Purpose  To evaluate the diagnostic role of CMR in defining the nature of cardiac masses. Methods : Ninety-three patients with cardiac masses evaluated with CMR were enrolled. All masses had histological certainty. CMR sequences allowed a qualitative morphologic description as well as tissue characterization. Evaluation of masses morphology included localization, size and borders assessment, detection of potential multiple lesions and pericardial effusion. Tissue characterization resulted from an estimation of contrast enhancement - early gadolinium enhancement (EGE) and late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) sequences - and tissue homogeneity in T1 and T2 weighted acquisitions. The descriptive analysis was carried out by comparing benign vs malignant lesions as well as dividing patients into 4 subgroups: primitive benign tumours, primitive malignant tumours, metastatic tumours and pseudotumours.  Results  The descriptive analysis of the morphologic features showed that diameter > 50mm, invasion of surrounding planes, irregular margins and presence of pericardial effusion were able to predict malignancy (p < 0.001). As for tissue characteristics, heterogeneous signal intensity - independently from T1 and T2 weighted acquisitions - and EGE were more common in malignant lesions (p <0.001). When analysing the four subgroups, CMR features did not discriminate between primitive malignant masses and metastasis. Conversely, hyperintensity signal and EGE were able to distinguish benign primitive lesions from pseudotumors (p = 0.002).  Furthermore, using classification and regression tree (CART) analysis, we developed an algorithm to differentiate masses: invasion of surrounding planes was a common characteristic of malignancy and identifies itself malignant tumors. In the absence of invasive features, gadolinium enhancement was evaluated: the lack of contrast uptake was able to exclude a pseudotumor diagnosis and reduced the probability of a primary benign tumor.  Conclusions Cardiac magnetic resonance is a very powerful diagnostic tool for differential diagnosis of cardiac masses as it correctly addresses malignancy. Furthermore, an accurate evaluation of the several CMR features, may discriminate primary benign masses and pseudotumours. Abstract Figure. Benign and malignant cardiac masses

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document