Assessment of acute myocarditis by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging: Comparison of qualitative and quantitative analysis methods

A case of myocarditis after COVID-19 vaccination: incidental or consequential?

Vaccination represents one of the fundamentals in the fight against SARS-CoV-2. Myocarditis has been reported as a rare but possible adverse consequence of different vaccines, and its clinical presentation can range from mild symptoms to acute heart failure. We report a case of a 29-year-old man who presented with fever and retrosternal pain after receiving SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and laboratory data revealed typical findings of acute myocarditis.

Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging during the COVID-19 pandemic: A southern Italian single-center experience

Purpose

We aimed to assess the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging studies performed during the lockdown imposed by the Italian Government from March 2020 to May 2020.

Materials and method

We reviewed the number and the findings of CMR scans performed during the COVID-19 pandemic between March and May 2020 at University of Naples Federico II. The number and the findings of CMR studies acquired in the corresponding months of 2017, 2018 and 2019 were also assessed for direct comparison.

Results

A total of 117 CMR studies was considered, including the procedures performed during the pandemic (n = 18) and those performed in the corresponding months of the prior 3 years (n = 99). The number of CMR studies performed during the COVID-19 pandemic was significantly (P < .01) lower compared to the mean number (n = 33) of the procedures performed in the corresponding months of 2017-2019. The percentage of abnormal CMR studies was similar (P = 0.73) during the pandemic (67 %) compared to that found in the corresponding months of 2017-2019 (70 %) suggesting that many abnormal tests were missed due to the lockdown.

Conclusion

The number of CMR studies was significantly reduced during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to the corresponding period of the previous three years. The lack of difference in the prevalence of abnormal CMR studies between the two study time intervals strongly suggests that many patients with potentially abnormal imaging test have been missed during the pandemic.

Loeffler's Endocarditis: An Integrated Multimodality Approach

Loeffler's endocarditis (LE) is the cardiac manifestation of hypereosinophilic syndrome, a rare systemic disease characterized by the sustained production of eosinophils leading to organ damage. Few data, principally by case reports, are available regarding the diagnostic workup in patients with suspected LE. Thus, we have performed a systematic search of the literature dealing with imaging in LE and propose an integrated multimodality imaging approach in the cardiac diagnostics of LE patients. The aim is to provide an updated state-of-the-art review focused on noninvasive and invasive imaging modalities for this rare and underdiagnosed disease. Standard and advanced echocardiography are typically the first cardiac imaging examinations when LE is suspected and they are also used later in follow-up for prognostic stratification and assessing response to treatment. Cardiac magnetic resonance provides a more detailed anatomical and functional evaluation of cardiac chambers, tissue characterization for the presence and extension of myocardial edema and fibrosis, and ventricular thrombi identification. Computed tomography scan and [18F]-fluoro-deoxy-glucose positron emission tomography may be helpful in selected cases to evaluate the cardiac involvement of LE as well as the other noncardiac manifestations of hypereosinophilic syndrome. Endomyocardial biopsy may be considered in patients with high clinical suspicion of LE if noninvasive imaging findings are confusing or not conclusive. The appropriate use of invasive and noninvasive imaging modalities, combining the available techniques with the patients' clinical features, will hopefully lead to early diagnosis, more accurate staging of disease, and timely treatment of LE that may prevent the irreversible myocardial damage of LE and adverse cardiovascular events.

Review of cardiovascular imaging in the Journal of Nuclear Cardiology 2019: Positron emission tomography, computed tomography and magnetic resonance

In 2019, the Journal of Nuclear Cardiology published excellent articles pertaining to imaging in patients with cardiovascular disease. In this review we will summarize a selection of these articles to provide a concise review of the main advancements that have recently occurred in the field and provide the reader with an opportunity to review a wide selection of articles. In this first article of this 2-part series we will focus on publications dealing with positron emission tomography, computed tomography and magnetic resonance. We will specifically discuss imaging as it relates to coronary artery disease, atherosclerosis and inflammation, coronary artery calcification, cardiomyopathies, cardiac implantable electronic devices, prosthetic valves, and left ventricular assist devices. The second part of this review will place emphasis on myocardial perfusion imaging using single-photon emission computed tomography.

The cardiac conundrum: a systematic review and bibliometric analysis of authorship in cardiac magnetic resonance imaging studies

PURPOSE

We aimed to assess the role of radiologists, cardiologists, and other medical and non-medical figures in cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) research in the last 34 years, focusing on first and last authorship, number of published studies, and journal impact factors (IF).

METHODS

Articles in the field of cardiac MRI were considered in this systematic review and retrospective bibliometric analysis. For included studies, the first and last authors were categorized as cardiologists, radiologists/nuclear medicine physicians, medical doctors (MD) with specialties in both cardiology and radiology/nuclear medicine, and other MD and non-MD. Differences in the number of papers published overall and by year and institution location for the first and last author category were assessed. Mean IF differences between author categories were also investigated.

RESULTS

A total of 2053 articles were included in the final analysis. For the first authors (n = 2011), 52% were cardiologists, 22% radiologists/nuclear medicine physicians, 16% other MD, 10% other non-MD, and 1% both cardiologists and radiologists/nuclear medicine physicians. Similarly, the last authors (n = 2029) resulted 54% cardiologists, 22% radiologists/nuclear medicine physicians, 15% other MD, 8% other non-MD, and 2% both cardiologists and radiologists/nuclear medicine physicians. No significant differences due to institution location in the first and last authorship proportions were found. Average journal IF was significantly higher for cardiologist first and last authors when compared to that of radiologists/nuclear medicine physicians (both p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Over 50% of studies in the field of cardiac MRI published in the last 34 years are conducted by cardiologists.

Left Ventricular Mass in Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy Assessed by 2D-Echocardiography: Validation with Magnetic Resonance Imaging

We aim to validate echocardiographic left ventricular (LV) mass (echoLVM) in sixty-one patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM), using cardiac magnetic resonance measures (cmrLVM) as gold standard. cmrLVM was calculated using LV short-axis images, from base to apex, whereas echoLVM by LV epicardial minus LV endocardial volumes in 4 and 2 chamber views, using Simpson disk summation; trabeculae and papillary muscle were excluded in both cmrLVM and echoLVM. cmrLVM and echoLVM were not different by paired t test (145 ± 66 vs 147 ± 61; p = 0.240), and their correlation was good (r = 0.977; p < 0.0001). Intraclass correlation demonstrated reliability of echoLVM with cmrLVM (ρ = 0.987; Cls = 0.978-0.992; p < 0.0001). LV end-diastolic volume was higher by CMR than that by echo (137 ± 33 vs 85 ± 28 mL, p < 0.0001), resulting in a lower mass/volume ratio (1.1 ± 0.4 vs 1.8 ± 0.8, p < 0.0001). EchoLVM may be determined in patients with HCM. However, mass/volume ratio is higher by echocardiography than that by CMR.

Diagnostic Performance of Extracellular Volume, Native T1, and T2 Mapping Versus Lake Louise Criteria by Cardiac Magnetic Resonance for Detection of Acute Myocarditis: A Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

The Lake Louise Criteria (LLC) were established in 2009 and are the recommended cardiac magnetic resonance imaging criterion for diagnosing patients with suspected myocarditis. Subsequently, newer parametric imaging techniques which can quantify T1, T2, and the extracellular volume (ECV) have been developed and may provide additional utility in the diagnosis of myocarditis. However, whether their diagnostic accuracy is superior to LLC remains unclear. In this meta-analysis, we compared the diagnostic performance of native T1, T2, ECV to LLC in diagnosing acute myocarditis.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We searched PubMed for published studies of LLC, native T1, ECV, and T2 diagnostic criteria used to diagnose acute myocarditis. Seventeen studies were included, with a total of 867 myocarditis patients and 441 control subjects. Pooled sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio of all diagnostic tests were assessed by bivariate analysis. LLC had a pooled sensitivity of 74%, specificity of 86%, and diagnostic odds ratio of 17.7. Native T1 had a significantly higher sensitivity than LLC (85% versus 74%, P=0.025). Otherwise, there was no significant difference in sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio when comparing LLC to native T1, T2, or ECV.

CONCLUSIONS

Native T1, T2, and ECV mapping provide comparable diagnostic performance to LLC. Although only native T1 had significantly better sensitivity than LLC, each technique offers distinct advantages for evaluating and characterizing myocarditis when compared with the LLC.