Three-dimensional assessment of image distortion induced by active cardiac implants in 3.0T CMR

CMR at 3.0T in the presence of active cardiac implants remains a challenge due to susceptibility artifacts. Beyond a signal void that cancels image information, magnetic field inhomogeneities may cause distorted appearances of anatomical structures. Understanding influencing factors and the extent of distortion are a first step towards optimizing the image quality of CMR with active implants at 3.0T. All measurements were obtained at a clinical 3.0T scanner. An in-house designed phantom with a 3D cartesian grid of water filled spheres was used to analyze the distortion caused by four representative active cardiac devices (cardiac loop recorder, pacemaker, 2 ICDs). For imaging a gradient echo (3D-TFE) sequence and a turbo spin echo (2D-TSE) sequence were used. The work defines metrics to quantify the different features of distortion such as changes in size, location and signal intensity. It introduces a specialized segmentation technique based on a reaction-diffusion-equation. The distortion features are dependent on the amount of magnetic material in the active implants and showed a significant increase when measured with the 3D TFE compared to the 2D TSE. This work presents a quantitative approach for the evaluation of image distortion at 3.0T caused by active cardiac implants and serves as foundation for both further optimization of sequences and devices but also for planning of imaging procedures.

Joint British Society consensus recommendations for magnetic resonance imaging for patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices

Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) is increasingly a fundamental component of the diagnostic pathway across a range of conditions. Historically, the presence of a cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) has been a contraindication for MRI, however, development of MR Conditional devices that can be scanned under strict protocols has facilitated the provision of MRI for patients. Additionally, there is growing safety data to support MR scanning in patients with CIEDs that do not have MR safety labelling or with MR Conditional CIEDs where certain conditions are not met, where the clinical justification is robust. This means that almost all patients with cardiac devices should now have the same access to MRI scanning in the National Health Service as the general population. Provision of MRI to patients with CIED, however, remains limited in the UK, with only half of units accepting scan requests even for patients with MR Conditional CIEDs. Service delivery requires specialist equipment and robust protocols to ensure patient safety and facilitate workflows, meanwhile demanding collaboration between healthcare professionals across many disciplines. This document provides consensus recommendations from across the relevant stakeholder professional bodies and patient groups to encourage provision of safe MRI for patients with CIEDs.

Breast MRI in patients with implantable loop recorder: initial experience

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the feasibility of breast MRI exams and guided biopsies in patients with an implantable loop recorder (ILR) as well as the impact ILRs may have on image interpretation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective study examined breast MRIs of patients with ILR, from April 2008 to September 2022. Radiological reports and electronic medical records were reviewed for demographic characteristics, safety concerns, and imaging findings. MR images were analyzed and compared statistically for artifact quantification on the various pulse sequences.

RESULTS

Overall, 40/82,778 (0.049%) MRIs during the study period included ILR. All MRIs were completed without early termination. No patient-related or device-related adverse events occurred. ILRs were most commonly located in the left lower-inner quadrant (64.6%). The main artifact was a signal intensity (SI) void in a dipole formation in the ILR bed with or without areas of peripheral high SI. Artifacts appeared greatest in the cranio-caudal axis (p < 0.001), followed by the anterior-posterior axis (p < 0.001), and then the right-left axis. High peripheral rim-like SI artifacts appeared on the post-contrast and subtracted T1-weighted images, mimicking suspicious enhancement. Artifacts were most prominent on diffusion-weighted (p < 0.001), followed by T2-weighted and T1-weighted images. In eight patients, suspicious findings were found on MRI, resulting in four additional malignant lesions. Of six patients with left breast cancer, the tumor was completely visible in five cases and partially obscured in one.

CONCLUSION

Breast MRI is feasible and safe among patients with ILR and may provide a significant diagnostic value, albeit with localized, characteristic artifacts.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT

Indicated breast MRI exams and guided biopsies can be safely performed in patients with implantable loop recorder. Nevertheless, radiologists should be aware of associated limitations including limited assessment of the inner left breast and pseudo-enhancement artifacts.

KEY POINTS

• Breast MRI in patients with an implantable loop recorder is an infrequent, feasible, and safe procedure. • Despite limited breast visualization of the implantable loop recorder bed and characteristic artifacts, MRI depicted additional lesions in 8/40 (20%) of cases, half of which were malignant. • Breast MRI in patients with an implantable loop recorder should be performed when indicated, taking into consideration typical associated artifacts.

Multimodality imaging in patients with implantable loop recorders: Tips and tricks

An implantable loop recorder (ILR) is a leadless rectangular device used for prolonged electrocardiographic monitoring for up to 3 years. This miniaturized device, inserted subcutaneously, allows clinicians to investigate possible cardiac rhythm disturbances in patients suffering from recurrent unexplained syncope. As the age of the population increases rapidly and the number of ILR patients amplifies, the clinical significance of ILRs is undeniable. Although radioopaque and easily seen on plain chest radiographs and other imaging modalities, ILRs may represent a challenge for clinicians and radiologists to recognize their classic appearance and differentiate them from numerous other cardiac devices. This article aims to summarize current literature on ILRs, their basic function, types, and indications for implantation, but most of all, it aims to familiarize clinicians and radiologists with common imaging features of these devices, safety issues, and artifact-reducing methods. Specifically, this review discusses the typical appearance of ILRs on major diagnostic imaging modalities, including chest X-ray, mammography, ultrasonography, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Furthermore, optimization strategies to mitigate image artifacts and safety issues regarding MRI are discussed.

Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance in Patients with Cardiac Electronic Devices: Evidence from a Multicenter Study

BACKGROUND

Most recent cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) can safely undergo a cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) scan under certain conditions, but metal artifacts may degrade image quality. The aim of this study was to assess the overall diagnostic yield of CMR and the extent of metal artifacts in a multicenter, multivendor study on CIED patients referred for CMR.

METHODS

We analyzed 309 CMR scans from 292 patients (age 57 ± 16 years, 219 male) with an MR-conditional pacemaker (n = 122), defibrillator (n = 149), or loop recorder (n = 38); CMR scans were performed in 10 centers from 2012 to 2020; MR-unsafe implants were excluded. Clinical and device parameters were recorded before and after the CMR scan. A visual analysis of metal artifacts was performed for each sequence on a segmental basis, based on a 5-point artifact score.

RESULTS

The vast majority of CMR scans (n = 255, 83%) were completely performed, while only 32 (10%) were interrupted soon after the first sequences and 22 (7%) were only partly acquired; CMR quality was non-diagnostic in 34 (11%) scans, poor (<1/3 sequences were diagnostic) in 25 (8%), or acceptable (1/3 to 2/3 sequences were diagnostic) in 40 (13%), while most scans (n = 201, 68%) were of overall good quality. No adverse event or device malfunctioning occurred, and only nonsignificant changes in device parameters were recorded. The most affected sequences were SSFP (median score 0.32 [interquartile range 0.07-0.91]), followed by GRE (0.18 [0.02-0.59]) and LGE (0.14 [0.02-0.55]). ICDs induced more artifacts (median score in SSFP images 0.87 [0.50-1.46]) than PMs (0.11 [0.03-0.28]) or ILRs (0.11 [0.00-0.56]). Moreover, most artifacts were located in the anterior, anteroseptal, anterolateral, and apical segments of the LV and in the outflow tract of the RV.

CONCLUSIONS

CMR is a versatile imaging technique, with a high safety profile and overall good image quality even in patients with MR-conditional CIEDs. Several strategies are now available to optimize image quality, substantially enhancing overall diagnostic yield.

Magnetic resonance in patients with cardiovascular devices. SEC-GT CRMTC/SEC-Heart Rhythm Association/SERAM/SEICAT consensus document

Magnetic resonance has become a first-line imaging modality in various clinical scenarios. The number of patients with different cardiovascular devices, including cardiac implantable electronic devices, has increased exponentially. Although there have been reports of risks associated with exposure to magnetic resonance in these patients, the clinical evidence now supports the safety of performing these studies under specific conditions and following recommendations to minimize possible risks. This document was written by the Working Group on Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Cardiac Computed Tomography of the Spanish Society of Cardiology (SEC-GT CRMTC), the Heart Rhythm Association of the Spanish Society of Cardiology (SEC-Heart Rhythm Association), the Spanish Society of Medical Radiology (SERAM), and the Spanish Society of Cardiothoracic Imaging (SEICAT). The document reviews the clinical evidence available in this field and establishes a series of recommendations so that patients with cardiovascular devices can safely access this diagnostic tool.

Magnetic resonance in patients with cardiovascular devices. SEC-GT CRMTC/SEC-Heart Rhythm Association/SERAM/SEICAT consensus document

Magnetic resonance has become a first-line imaging modality in various clinical scenarios. The number of patients with different cardiovascular devices, including cardiac implantable electronic devices, has increased exponentially. Although there have been reports of risks associated with exposure to magnetic resonance in these patients, the clinical evidence now supports the safety of performing these studies under specific conditions and following recommendations to minimize possible risks. This document was written by the Working Group on Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Cardiac Computed Tomography of the Spanish Society of Cardiology (SEC-GT CRMTC), the Heart Rhythm Association of the Spanish Society of Cardiology (SEC-Heart Rhythm Association), the Spanish Society of Medical Radiology (SERAM), and the Spanish Society of Cardiothoracic Imaging (SEICAT). The document reviews the clinical evidence available in this field and establishes a series of recommendations so that patients with cardiovascular devices can safely access this diagnostic tool.

Reducing cardiac implantable electronic device-induced artefacts in cardiac magnetic resonance imaging

OBJECTIVES

Cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED)-induced metal artefacts possibly significantly diminish the diagnostic value of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), particularly cardiac MR (CMR). Right-sided generator implantation, wideband late-gadolinium enhancement (LGE) technique and raising the ipsilateral arm to the generator during CMR scanning may reduce the CIED-induced image artefacts. We assessed the impact of generator location and the arm-raised imaging position on the CIED-induced artefacts in CMR.

METHODS

We included all clinically indicated CMRs performed on patients with normal cardiac anatomy and a permanent CIED with endocardial pacing leads between November 2011 and October 2019 in our institution (n = 171). We analysed cine and LGE sequences using the American Heart Association 17-segment model for the presence of artefacts.

RESULTS

Right-sided generator implantation and arm-raised imaging associated with a significantly increased number of artefact-free segments. In patients with a right-sided pacemaker, the median percentage of artefact-free segments in short-axis balanced steady-state free precession LGE was 93.8% (IQR 9.4%, n = 53) compared with 78.1% (IQR 20.3%, n = 58) for left-sided pacemaker (p < 0.001). In patients with a left-sided implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, the median percentage of artefact-free segments reached 87.5% (IQR 6.3%, n = 9) using arm-raised imaging, which fell to 62.5% (IQR 34.4%, n = 9) using arm-down imaging in spoiled gradient echo short-axis cine (p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Arm-raised imaging represents a straightforward method to reduce CMR artefacts in patients with left-sided generators and can be used alongside other image quality improvement methods. Right-sided generator implantation could be considered in CIED patients requiring subsequent CMR imaging to ensure sufficient image quality.

KEY POINTS

• Cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED)-induced metal artefacts may significantly diminish the diagnostic value of an MRI, particularly in cardiac MRIs. • Raising the ipsilateral arm relative to the CIED generator is a cost-free, straightforward method to significantly reduce CIED-induced artefacts on cardiac MRIs in patients with a left-sided generator. • Right-sided generator implantation reduces artefacts compared with left-sided implantation and could be considered in CIED patients requiring subsequent cardiac MRIs to ensure adequate image quality in the future.

Incidence and Predictors of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices Malfunction with Radiotherapy Treatment

Aims: To investigate the incidence of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) malfunction with radiotherapy (RT) treatment and assess predictors of CIED malfunction. Methods: A 6-year retrospective analysis of patients who underwent RT with CIED identified through the radiation oncology electronic database. Clinical, RT (cumulative dose, dose per fraction, beam energy, beam energy dose, and anatomical area of RT) and CIED details (type, manufacturer, and device malfunction) were collected from electronic medical records. Results: We identified 441 patients with CIED who underwent RT. CIED encountered a permanent pacemaker (PPM) (78%), cardiac resynchronization therapy—pacing (CRT-P) (2%), an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) (10%), and a CRT-defibrillator (CRT-D) (10%). The mean cumulative dose of RT was 36 gray (Gy) (IQR 1.8–80 Gy) and the most common beam energy used was photon ≥10 megavolt (MV) with a median dose of 7 MV (IQR 5–18 MV). We further identified 17 patients who had CIED malfunction with RT. This group had a higher cumulative RT dose of 42.5 Gy (20–77 Gy) and a photon dose of 14 MV (12–18 MV). None of the malfunctions resulted in clinical symptoms. Using logistic regression, the predictors of CIED malfunction were photon beam energy use ≥10 MV (OR 5.73; 95% CI, 1.58–10.76), anatomical location of RT above the diaphragm (OR 5.2, 95% CI, 1.82–15.2), and having a CIED from the ICD group (OR 4.6, 95% CI, 0.75–10.2). Conclusion: Clinicians should be aware of predictors of CIED malfunction with RT to ensure the safety of patients.

[Cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging in patients with cardiac devices : Useful tool or just artifacts?]

Cardiac magnetic resonance tomography (CMR) in patients with implanted cardiac devices is a challenge. This is due to artifacts that can occur in the presence of metallic implants such as device leads and generators and can ultimately lead to impaired or non-diagnostic images. Preliminary studies indicate that by employing newly developed MRI sequences together with well-established sequences, these problems can be mitigated. To aid in daily routine, an adaptive imaging workflow has been proposed which allows for tailored image acquisition.

State-of-the-Art Multimodality Imaging in Sudden Cardiac Arrest with Focus on Idiopathic Ventricular Fibrillation: A Review

Idiopathic ventricular fibrillation is a rare cause of sudden cardiac arrest and a diagnosis by exclusion. Unraveling the mechanism of ventricular fibrillation is important for targeted management, and potentially for initiating family screening. Sudden cardiac arrest survivors undergo extensive clinical testing, with a growing role for multimodality imaging, before diagnosing “idiopathic” ventricular fibrillation. Multimodality imaging, considered as using multiple imaging modalities as diagnostics, is important for revealing structural myocardial abnormalities in patients with cardiac arrest. This review focuses on combining imaging modalities (echocardiography, cardiac magnetic resonance and computed tomography) and the electrocardiographic characterization of sudden cardiac arrest survivors and discusses the surplus value of multimodality imaging in the diagnostic routing of these patients. We focus on novel insights obtained through electrostructural and/or electromechanical imaging in apparently idiopathic ventricular fibrillation patients, with special attention to non-invasive electrocardiographic imaging.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Dyspnea-Suspected Cardiac Origin (Ischemia Already Excluded): 2021 Update

Dyspnea is the symptom of perceived breathing discomfort and is commonly encountered in a variety of clinical settings. Cardiac etiologies of dyspnea are an important consideration; among these, valvular heart disease (Variant 1), arrhythmia (Variant 2), and pericardial disease (Variant 3) are reviewed in this document. Imaging plays an important role in the clinical assessment of these suspected abnormalities, with usually appropriate procedures including resting transthoracic echocardiography in all three variants, radiography for Variants 1 and 3, MRI heart function and morphology in Variants 2 and 3, and CT heart function and morphology with intravenous contrast for Variant 3. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment.

Signal voids of active cardiac implants at 3.0 T CMR

Recent technical advancements allow cardiac MRI (CMR) examinations in the presence of so-called MRI conditional active cardiac implants at 3.0 T. However, the artifact burden caused by susceptibility effects remain an obstacle. All measurements were obtained at a clinical 3.0 T scanner using an in-house designed cubic phantom and optimized sequences for artifact evaluation (3D gradient echo sequence, multi-slice 2D turbo spin echo sequence). Reference sequences according to the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) were additionally applied. Four representative active cardiac devices and a generic setup were analyzed regarding volume and shape of the signal void. For analysis, a threshold operation was applied to the grey value profile of each data set. The presented approach allows the evaluation of the signal void and shape even for larger implants such as ICDs. The void shape is influenced by the orientation of the B0-field and by the chosen sequence type. The distribution of ferromagnetic material within the implants also matters. The void volume depends both on the device itself, and on the sequence type. Disturbances in the B0 and B1 fields exceed the visual signal void. This work presents a reproducible and highly defined approach to characterize both signal void artifacts at 3.0 T and their influencing factors.

Feasibility of adenosine stress cardiovascular magnetic resonance perfusion imaging in patients with MR-conditional transvenous permanent pacemakers and defibrillators

BACKGROUND

The use of stress perfusion-cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging remains limited in patients with implantable devices. The primary goal of the study was to assess the safety, image quality, and the diagnostic value of stress perfusion-CMR in patients with MR-conditional transvenous permanent pacemakers (PPM) or implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICD).

METHODS

Consecutive patients with a transvenous PPM or ICD referred for adenosine stress-CMR were enrolled in this single-center longitudinal study. The CMR protocol was performed using a 1.5 T system according to current guidelines while all devices were put in MR-mode. Quality of cine, late-gadolinium-enhancement (LGE), and stress perfusion sequences were assessed. An ischemia burden of ≥ 1.5 segments was considered significant. We assessed the safety, image quality and the occurrence of interference of the magnetic field with the implantable device. In case of ischemia, we also assessed the correlation with the presence of significant coronary lesions on coronary angiography.

RESULTS

Among 3743 perfusion-CMR examinations, 66 patients had implantable devices (1.7%). Image quality proved diagnostic in 98% of cases. No device damage or malfunction was reported immediately and at 1 year. Fifty patients were continuously paced during CMR. Heart rate and systolic blood pressure remained unchanged during adenosine stress, while diastolic blood pressure decreased (p = 0.007). Six patients (9%) had an ischemia-positive stress CMR and significant coronary stenoses were confirmed by coronary angiography in all cases.

CONCLUSION

Stress perfusion-CMR is safe, allows reliable ischemia detection, and provides good diagnostic value.

[MRI-based catheter ablation : Current status and outlook]

Fluoroscopy-based catheter ablation has established itself as a standard procedure for the treatment of patients with cardiac arrhythmias. However, it is subject to certain limitations with regard to the visualization of arrhythmogenic substrate and ablation lesions and is associated with radiation exposure. Within the framework of studies, initial experience with MRI-based, radiation-free electrophysiological examinations and ablations could be gained. The integration of MRI technology into electrophysiological procedures promises numerous advantages. The ability to operate in a radiation-free environment during MRI-based catheter ablation is significant and promising. Furthermore, MRI provides important procedure-relevant information in terms of visualization of individual arrhythmogenic substrate. In order to further improve immediate and long-term ablation success, especially in the context of complex arrhythmias and structural heart disease, the direct and successful integration of MRI-generated findings into the ablation process is of utmost importance. The future of MRI-based catheter ablation could thus lie in particular in the treatment of more complex cardiac arrhythmias, which require personalized therapy paths. In this respect, however, the data situation is still extremely limited. Further technical developments and larger studies are indispensable in order to gain further important insights into the feasibility, safety and success rate of MRI-based invasive electrophysiological diagnostics and therapy in comparison to conventional ablation methods.

Is diversity harmful?-Mixed-brand cardiac implantable electronic devices undergoing magnetic resonance imaging

Background

Many patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) undergo magnetic resonance imaging (MRI); however, a relevant proportion have a CIED system that has not been classified as MRI-conditional because of generators and leads from different brands (mixed-brand group). The available data concerning the outcome of these mixed patients undergoing MRI is limited.

Methods

A retrospective single center study, including all patients with CIEDs undergoing MRI between January 2013 until May 2020, was performed. Primary endpoints were defined as death or any adverse event necessitating hospitalization or CIED revision. Secondary endpoints were the occurrence of any sign for beginning device or lead failure or patient discomfort during MRI.

Results

A total of 227 MRI examinations, including 10 thoracic MRIs, were carried out in 158 patients, with 1–9 MRIs per patient. Of the patients 38 underwent 54 procedures in the mixed-brand group and 89 patients underwent 134 MRIs in the MRI-conditional group. Of the patients 31 were excluded since the MRI conditionality could not be determined. No primary endpoints occurred within the mixed-brand group but in 2.2% of the MRI-conditional group (p = 1.000), with 2 patients developing new atrial fibrillation during MRI, of whom one additionally had a transient CIED dysfunction. No secondary endpoints were met in the mixed-brand group compared to 3.4% in the MRI-conditional group (p = 0.554). No complications occurred in the excluded patients.

Conclusion

The complication rate of CIED patients undergoing MRI was low. Patients with a mixed CIED system showed no signs of increased risk of adverse events compared to patients with MRI-conditional CIED systems.

Supplementary Information

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00508-021-01924-w) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Predictors of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Artifact on Cardiac MRI: The Utility of a Device Related Score

PURPOSE

Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) image quality can be degraded by artifact in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED). We aimed to establish a clinical risk score, so patient selection for diagnostic CMR could be optimised.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, CMRs performed for clinical use in subjects with CIED from January 2016 to May 2019 were reviewed. Subject anthropometry, CIED generator/lead specifications and pre-scan chest X-ray (CXR) measurements were collected. Generator-related artifact size was measured on axial steady state free precession images. Interpretability of late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) imaging was performed based on a three-grade visual score attributed to each of 17 myocardial segments.

RESULTS

Fifty-seven (57) patients (59±16 years, 74% male) fitted the inclusion criteria. Artifact precluded left ventricle (LV) evaluation (≥5 segments) in 17 (30%). Artifact was more common with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators, related to generator volume, mass, height, width, thickness, and area, along with right ventricular (RV) lead length and diameter (all p<0.05). Artifact was associated with distance from generator to LV apex, generator to RV lead tip and shortest distance from generator to heart on CXR (all p<0.05). On multivariable regression modelling, RV lead diameter (OR 5.861, 95% CI 1.866-18.407, p=0.002) and distance from generator to LV apex (OR 0.693, 95% CI 0.511-0.940, p=0.019) were independent predictors of artifact. Multivariable predictors were used to develop Device Related CMR Artifact Prediction Score (DR-CAPS), where all patients with DR-CAPS=0 had fully interpretable LGE imaging.

CONCLUSION

Simple, readily available measures, such as lead characteristics and pre-scan CXR measures, can stratify patients via an artifact prediction score to optimise selection for diagnostic CMR.

Impact of Wideband Late Gadolinium Enhancement Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging on Device-Related Artifacts in Different Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Types

BACKGROUND

Late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) imaging in patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICD) is limited by device-related artifacts (DRA). The use of wideband (WB) LGE protocols improves LGE images, but their efficacy with different ICD types is not well known.

PURPOSE

To assess the effects of WB LGE imaging on DRA in different non-MR conditional ICD subtypes.

STUDY TYPE

Retrospective.

POPULATION

A total of 113 patients undergoing cardiac magnetic resonance imaging with three ICD subtypes: transvenous (TV-ICD, N = 48), cardiac-resynchronization therapy device (CRT-D, N = 48), and subcutaneous (S-ICD, N = 17).

FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE

5 T scanner, standard LGE, and WB LGE imaging with a phase-sensitive inversion recovery segmented gradient echo sequence.

ASSESSMENT

DRA burden was defined as the number of artifact-positive short-axis LGE slices as percentage of the total number of short-axis slices covering the left ventricle from based to apex, and was determined for WB and standard LGE studies for each patient. Additionally, artifact area on each slice was quantified.

STATISTICAL TESTS

Shapiro-Wilks, Kruskal-Wallis analysis of variance, Dunn tests with Bonferroni correction, and Mann-Whitney U-test.

RESULTS

In patients with TV-ICD, DRA burden was significantly reduced and nearly eliminated with WB LGE compared to standard LGE imaging (median [interquartile range]: 0 [0-7]% vs. 18 [0-50]%, P < 0.05), but WB imaging had less of an impact on DRA in the CRT-D (8 [0-23]% vs. 16 [0-45]%, p = 0.12) and S-ICD (60 [15-71]% vs. 67 [50-92]%, P = 0.09) patients. Residual DRA was significantly greater (P < 0.05) for S-ICD compared to other device types with WB LGE imaging, despite the generators of all three ICD types having similar proximity to the heart. The area of S-ICD associated DRA was smaller with WB LGE (P < 0.001) than with standard LGE imaging and the artifacts had different characteristics (dark signal void instead of a bright hyperenhancement artifact).

DATA CONCLUSION

Although WB LGE imaging reduced the burden of DRA caused by S-ICD, the residual artifact was greater than that observed with TV-ICD and CRT-D devices. Further developments are needed to better resolve S-ICD artifacts.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

1 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: STAGE: 5.

Safety and image quality of cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging in patients with retained epicardial pacing wires after heart transplantation

BACKGROUND

Temporary epicardial pacing wires, implemented in patients during heart transplantation, are routinely removed before discharge. However, in some cases, these wires may remain in situ and are often considered as a contraindication for cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging in the future. Therefore, we aimed to provide data about safety and image quality of CMR in these patients.

METHODS

This is a report on a subpopulation out of 88 patients after heart transplantation that were included in a prospective cohort study and underwent multiple CMR in their post-transplant course. During CMR, patients were monitored by electrocardiogram and all examinations were observed by a physician to document potential adverse events. Additionally, image quality was assessed by an imaging specialist.

RESULTS

Nineteen of 88 patients included had temporary pacing wires in situ. These patients underwent a total of 51 CMR studies. No major adverse event and only one single, mild sensory event could be documented. All CMR studies showed preserved diagnostic image quality. Temporary pacing wires were visible in 100% of HASTE and cine sequences. In less than 50% of the examinations, temporary pacing wires were also visible in T1 and T2 mapping, short tau inversion recovery (STIR), and late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) sequences, without any impairment of image quality.

CONCLUSIONS

With a low event rate of only one mild adverse event during 51 CMR examinations (2%), CMR appears to be safe in patients with retained temporary epicardial pacing wires after heart transplantation. Moreover, image quality was not impaired by the presence of pacing wires.

Quantification of artifacts during cardiac magnetic resonance in patients with leadless Micra pacemakers

INTRODUCTION

When cardiac magnetic resonance (MR) is performed after previous leadless transcatheter pacemaker implantation, an image distortion has to be expected in the heart region and evaluation of myocardial tissue can be affected. In this clinical prospective study, we aim to assess the extent and impact of this artifact on individual ventricular segments and compare it to conventional pacing devices.

METHODS

Total of 20 patients with leadless pacemaker placed in the right ventricle underwent cardiac MR imaging in a 1.5 Tesla scanner. A multiplanar segmentation was used to demarcate the left and right ventricular myocardium as well as the pacemaker-caused image artifact in systolic and diastolic time frames. Artifact size and its relative influence on myocardial segments were quantitatively assessed and expressed in AHA-17 model.

RESULTS

Implanted leadless pacemaker caused an image artifact with a volume of 48 ± 5 ml. Most distorted were the apical septal (53 ± 23%), apical inferior (30 ± 18%), and midventricular inferoseptal (30 ± 20%) segments. The artifact intersection with basal and lateral segments was none or negligible (up to 2%). The portion of left ventricular (LV) myocardium affected by the artifact was significantly higher in systole (8 ± 4%) compared to diastole (10 ± 3%; p < .001).

CONCLUSION

Implantation of leadless pacemaker represents no obstacle for cardiac MR imaging but causes an image artifact located mostly in septal, inferoseptal, and anteroseptal segments of apical and midventricular LV myocardium. With the exception of the apex, diastolic timing reduces the image distortion of all segments and improves global ventricular assessment.

Cardiovascular magnetic resonance: What clinicians should know about safety and contraindications

Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (MR) is a multiparametric, non-ionizing, non-invasive imaging technique, which represents the imaging gold standard to study cardiac anatomy, function and tissue characterization. Faced with a wide range of clinical application, in this review we aim to provide a comprehensive guide for clinicians about MR safety, contraindications and image quality. Starting from the physical interactions of the static magnetic fields, gradients and radiofrequencies with the human body, we will describe the most common metal and electronic devices which are allowed (MR-safe), allowed under limited conditions (MR-conditional) or contraindicated (MR-unsafe). Moreover, some conditions potentially affecting image quality and patient comfort will be mentioned, including arrhythmias, claustrophobia, and poor breath-hold capacity. Finally, we will discuss the pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of current gadolinium-based contrast agents, their contraindications and their potential acute and chronic adverse effects, as well as the safety issue concerning the use of vasodilating/inotropic agents in stress cardiac MR.

Evaluation of image quality of wideband single-shot late gadolinium-enhancement MRI in patients with a cardiac implantable electronic device

INTRODUCTION

While wideband segmented, breath-hold late gadolinium-enhancement (LGE) cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) has been shown to suppress image artifacts associated with cardiac-implanted electronic devices (CIEDs), it may produce image artifacts in patients with arrhythmia and/or dyspnea. Single-shot LGE is capable of suppressing said artifacts. We sought to compare the performance of wideband single-shot free-breathing LGE against the standard and wideband-segmented LGEs in CIED patients.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We retrospectively identified all 54 consecutive patients (mean age: 61 ± 15 years; 31% females) with CIED who had undergone CMR with standard segmented, wideband segmented, and/or wideband single-shot LGE sequences as part of quality assurance for determining best clinical practice at 1.5 T. Two raters independently graded the conspicuity of myocardial scar or normal myocardium and the presence of device artifact level on a 5-point Likert scale (1: worst; 3: acceptable; 5: best). Summed visual score (SVS) was calculated as the sum of conspicuity and artifact scores (SVS ≥ 6 defined as diagnostically interpretable). Median conspicuity and artifact scores were significantly better for wideband single-shot LGE (F = 24.2, p < .001) and wideband-segmented LGE (F = 20.6, p < .001) compared to standard-segmented LGE. Among evaluated myocardial segments, 72% were deemed diagnostically interpretable-defined as SVS ≥ 6-for standard-segmented LGE, 89% were deemed diagnostically interpretable for wideband-segmented LGE, and 94% segments were deemed diagnostically interpretable for wideband single-shot LGE.

CONCLUSIONS

Wideband single-shot LGE and wideband-segmented LGE produced similarly improved image quality compared to standard LGE.

Cardiac magnetic resonance in patients with cardiac resynchronization therapy: is it time to scan with resynchronization on?

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is recommended in international guidelines for patients with heart failure due to important left ventricular systolic dysfunction (or heart failure with reduced ejection fraction) and ventricular conduction tissue disease. Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) represents the most powerful imaging tool for dynamic assessment of the volumes and function of cardiac chambers but is rarely utilized in patients with CRT due to limitations on the device, programming and scanning. In this review, we explore the known utility of CMR in this cohort with discussion of the risks and potential benefits of scanning whilst CRT is active, including a practical strategy for conducting high quality scans safely. Our contention is that imaging in patients with CRT could be improved further by keeping resynchronization therapy active with resultant benefits on research and also patient outcomes.

Evaluation of the right heart using cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging in patients with cardiac devices

BACKGROUND

Patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) necessitate comprehensive cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) examinations. The aim of this study was to provide data on CMR image quality and feasibility of functional assessment of the right heart in patients with CIED depending on the device type and imaging sequence used.

METHODS

120 CIED carriers (Insertable cardiac monitoring system, n = 13; implantable loop-recorder, n = 22; pacemaker, n = 30; implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD), n = 43; and cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillator (CRT-D), n = 12) underwent clinically indicated CMR imaging using a 1.5 T. CMR protocols consisted of cine imaging and myocardial tissue characterization including T1-and T2-weighted blackblood imaging and late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) imaging. Image quality was evaluated with regard to device-related imaging artifacts per right-ventricular (RV) segment.

RESULTS

RV segmental evaluability was influenced by the device type and CMR imaging sequence: Cine steady-state-free-precision (SSFP) imaging was found to be non-diagnostic in patients with ICD/CRT-D and implantable loop recorders; a significant improvement of image quality was achieved when using cine turbo-field-echo (TFE) sequences with a further improvement on post-contrast TFE imaging. LGE scans were artifact-free in at least 91% of RV segments with best results in patients with a pacemaker or an insertable cardiac monitoring system.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with CIED, artifact-free CMR imaging of the right ventricle was performed in the majority of patients and resulted in highly reproducible evaluability of RV functional parameters. This finding is of particular importance for the diagnosis and follow-up of right-ventricular diseases.

Joint Position Paper of the Working Group of Pacing and Electrophysiology of the French Society of Cardiology (SFC) and the Société française d'imagerie cardiaque et vasculaire diagnostique et interventionnelle (SFICV) on magnetic resonance imaging in patients with cardiac electronic implantable devices

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has become the reference imaging for the management of a large number of diseases. The number of MR examinations increases every year, simultaneously with the number of patients receiving a cardiac electronic implantable device (CEID). A CEID was considered an absolute contraindication for MRI for years. The progressive replacement of conventional pacemakers and defibrillators by MR-conditional CEIDs and recent data on the safety of MRI in patients with "MR-nonconditional" CEIDs have progressively increased the demand for MRI in patients with a CEID. However, some risks are associated with MRI in CEID carriers, even with "MR-conditional" devices because these devices are not "MR-safe". A specific programing of the device in "MR-mode" and monitoring patients during MRI remain mandatory for all patients with a CEID. A standardized patient workflow based on an institutional protocol should be established in each institution performing such examinations. This joint position paper of the Working Group of Pacing and Electrophysiology of the French Society of Cardiology and the Société française d'imagerie cardiaque et vasculaire diagnostique et interventionnelle (SFICV) describes the effect and risks associated with MRI in CEID carriers. We propose recommendations for patient workflow and monitoring and CEID programming in MR-conditional, "MR-conditional nonguaranteed" and MR-nonconditional devices.

Cardiac Magnetic Resonance in Patients With Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices: Challenges and Solutions

Until recently, cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) were an absolute contraindication to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), due to concerns about their adverse interaction in the MRI environment. The increasing clinical need to perform MRI examinations in these patients was an impetus to the development of MR-Conditional CIEDs. Secure performance of MRI in these patients requires scanning under specified MR conditions as well as operating the device in MR-scanning mode. This requires robust institutional protocols and a well-trained multidisciplinary team of radiologists, cardiologists, device applications specialists, physicists, nurses, and MRI technologists. MRI can also be performed in patients with non-MRI Conditional or "legacy" CIEDs by following safety precautions and continuous monitoring. Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) is additionally challenging due to expected susceptibility artifacts generated by the CIEDs, which are either near or in the heart. As the most common indication for CMR in these patients is the evaluation of myocardial scar/fibrosis, acquiring a high-quality late gadolinium enhancement image is of the utmost importance. This sequence is hampered by artifactual high signal due to inadequate myocardial nulling. Several solutions are available to reduce these artifacts, including reducing inhomogeneity, technical adjustments, and use of sequences that are more resilient to artifacts. In this article, we review the precautions for CMR in patients with CIEDs, provide guidelines for secure performance of CMR in these patients, and discuss techniques for obtaining high quality CMR images with minimized artifacts.

Clinical utility of cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging in patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators presenting with electrical instability or worsening heart failure symptoms

BACKGROUND

Data on the usefulness of cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging for clinical decision making in patients with an implanted cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) are scarce. The present study determined the impact of CMR imaging on diagnostic stratification and treatment decisions in ICD patients presenting with electrical instability or progressive heart failure symptoms.

METHODS

212 consecutive ICD patients underwent 1.5 T CMR combining diagnostic imaging modules tailored to the individual clinical indication (ventricular function assessment, myocardial tissue characterization, adenosine stress-perfusion, 3D-contrast-enhanced angiography); four CMR examinations (4/212, 2%) were excluded due to non-diagnostic CMR image quality. The resultant change in diagnosis or clinical management was determined in the overall population and compared between ICD patients for primary (115/208, 55%) or secondary prevention (93/208, 45%). Referral indication consisted of documented ventricular tachycardia, inadequate device therapy or progressive heart failure symptoms.

RESULTS

Overall, CMR imaging data changed diagnosis in 40% (83/208) with a significant difference between primary versus secondary prevention ICD patients (37/115, 32% versus 46/93, 49%, respectively; p = 0.01). The information gain from CMR led to an overall change in treatment in 21% (43/208) with a similar distribution in primary versus secondary prevention ICD patients (25/115,22% versus 18/93,19%, p = 0.67). The effect on treatment change was highest in patients initially scheduled for ventricular tachycardia ablation procedure (18/141, 13%) with revision of the treatment plan to medical therapy or coronary revascularization.

CONCLUSIONS

CMR imaging in ICD patients presenting with electrical instability or worsening heart failure symptoms provided diagnostic or management-changing information in a considerable proportion (40% and 21%, respectively).

Biventricular pacing during cardiac magnetic resonance imaging

AIMS

We aimed to assess the effect of cardiac resynchronization on left ventricular (LV) function, volumes, geometry, and mechanics in order to demonstrate reverse remodelling using cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) with resynchronization on.

METHODS AND RESULTS

New York Heart Association (NYHA) Class II-III patients on optimal medical therapy with LV ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤35%, and complete LBBB with broad QRS (>150 ms) were prospectively recruited. Cardiac magnetic resonance examination was performed at baseline and at 6-month follow-up, applying both biventricular and AOO pacing. The following data were measured: conventional CMR parameters, remodelling indices, global longitudinal, circumferential, radial strain, global dyssynchrony [mechanical dispersion (MD) defined as the standard deviation of time to peak longitudinal/circumferential strain in 16 LV segments], and regional dyssynchrony (maximum differences in time between peak septal and lateral transversal displacement). Thirteen patients (64 ± 7 years, 38% male) were enrolled. Comparing the baseline and follow-up CMR parameters measured during biventricular pacing, significant increase in LVEF, and decrease in LV end-diastolic volume index (LVEDVi) and LV end-systolic volume index (LVESVi) were found. Left ventricular remodelling indices, global longitudinal, circumferential, and radial strain values showed significant improvement. Circumferential MD decreased (20.5 ± 5.5 vs. 13.4 ± 3.4, P < 0.001), while longitudinal MD did not change. Regional dyssynchrony drastically improved (362 ± 96 vs. 104 ± 66 ms, P < 0.001). Applying AOO pacing resulted in an immediate deterioration in LVEF, LVESVi, circumferential strain, global and regional dyssynchrony.

CONCLUSION

Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging during biventricular pacing is feasible and enables a more precise quantification of LV function, morphology, and mechanics. As a result, it may contribute to a better understanding of the effects of resynchronization therapy and might improve responder rate in the future.

Making MRI available for patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices: growing need and barriers to change

Abstract

More than half of us will need a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan in our lifetimes. MRI is an unmatched diagnostic test for an expanding range of indications including neurological and musculoskeletal disorders, cancer diagnosis, and treatment planning. Unfortunately, patients with cardiac pacemakers or defibrillators have historically been prevented from having MRI because of safety concerns. This results in delayed diagnoses, more invasive investigations, and increased cost. Major developments have addressed this—newer devices are designed to be safe in MRI machines under specific conditions, and older legacy devices can be scanned provided strict protocols are followed. This service however remains difficult to deliver sustainably worldwide: MRI provision remains grossly inadequate because patients are less likely to be referred, and face difficulties accessing services even when referred. Barriers still exist but are no longer technical. These include logistical hurdles (poor cardiology and radiology interaction at physician and technician levels), financial incentives (re-imbursement is either absent or fails to acknowledge the complexity), and education (physicians self-censor MRI requests). This article therefore highlights the recent changes in the clinical, logistical, and regulatory landscape. The aim of the article is to enable and encourage healthcare providers and local champions to build MRI services urgently for cardiac device patients, so that they may benefit from the same access to MRI as everyone else.

Key Points

• There is now considerable evidence that MRI can be provided safely to patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs). However, the volume of MRI scans delivered to patients with CIEDs is fifty times lower than that of the estimated need, and patients are approximately fifty times less likely to be referred.

• Because scans for this patient group are frequently for cancer diagnosis and treatment planning, MRI services need to develop rapidly, but the barriers are no longer technical.

• New services face logistical, educational, and financial hurdles which can be addressed effectively to establish a sustainable service at scale.

CT and MR imaging of the upper extremity vasculature: pearls, pitfalls, and challenges

Imaging is needed for diagnosis, treatment planning, and follow-up of patients with pathologies affecting upper extremity vasculature. With growth and evolution of imaging modalities [especially CT angiography (CTA) and MR angiography (MRA)], there is need to recognize the advantages and disadvantages of various modalities and obtain the best possible imaging diagnostic test. Understanding various limitations and pitfalls as well as the best practices to minimize and manage these pitfalls is very important for the diagnosis. This article reviews the upper extremity arterial vascular anatomy, discusses the CTA and MRA imaging, various pitfalls, and challenges and discuss imaging manifestations of upper extremity arterial pathologies.

The year 2018 in the European Heart Journal - Cardiovascular Imaging: Part I

The European Heart Journal - Cardiovascular Imaging has become one of the leading multimodality cardiovascular imaging journal, since it was launched in 2012. The impact factor is an impressive 8.366 and it is now established as one of the top 10 cardiovascular journals. The journal is the most important cardiovascular imaging journal in Europe. The most important studies from 2018 will be highlighted in two reports. Part I of the review will focus on studies about myocardial function and risk prediction, myocardial ischaemia, and emerging techniques in cardiovascular imaging, while Part II will focus on valvular heart disease, heart failure, cardiomyopathies, and congenital heart disease.

Magnetic resonance imaging guidance for the optimization of ventricular tachycardia ablation

Catheter ablation has an important role in the management of patients with ventricular tachycardia (VT) but is limited by modest long-term success rates. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can provide valuable anatomic and functional information as well as potentially improve identification of target sites for ablation. A major limitation of current MRI protocols is the spatial resolution required to identify the areas of tissue responsible for VT but recent developments have led to new strategies which may improve substrate assessment. Potential ways in which detailed information gained from MRI may be utilized during electrophysiology procedures include image integration or performing a procedure under real-time MRI guidance. Image integration allows pre-procedural magnetic resonance (MR) images to be registered with electroanatomical maps to help guide VT ablation and has shown promise in preliminary studies. However, multiple errors can arise during this process due to the registration technique used, changes in ventricular geometry between the time of MRI and the ablation procedure, respiratory and cardiac motion. As isthmus sites may only be a few millimetres wide, reducing these errors may be critical to improve outcomes in VT ablation. Real-time MR-guided intervention has emerged as an alternative solution to address the limitations of pre-acquired imaging to guide ablation. There is now a growing body of literature describing the feasibility, techniques, and potential applications of real-time MR-guided electrophysiology. We review whether real-time MR-guided intervention could be applied in the setting of VT ablation and the potential challenges that need to be overcome.

Cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices: best practice and real-world experience

Aims

Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging has long been a contraindication for patients with a cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED). Recent studies support the feasibility and safety for non-thoracic magnetic resonance imaging, but data for CMR are sparse. The aim of the current study was to determine the safety in patients with magnetic resonance (MR)-conditional or non-MR-conditional CIED and to develop a best practice approach.

Methods and results

All patients with a CIED undergoing CMR imaging (1.5 T) between April 2014 and April 2017 were included in the study. Devices were programmed according to the standardized protocol directly before and after the CMR examination. Follow-up interrogation was performed 6 months after CMR examination. Results were compared with a large, reference cohort of CIED patients not undergoing any MR examination. A total of 200 consecutive patients with a CIED (non-MR-conditional, n = 103) were included in the study. Directly after CMR imaging, one device failure (0.5%, battery status = end of service) was noted necessitating premature generator replacement. In three patients (2%) of pacemaker/implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) carriers a sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT) occurred during CMR imaging. Ten ICD showed a decrease in battery capacity immediately after CMR. Overall, the reference cohort showed comparable changes of CIED function during follow-up.

Conclusion

With adherence to a standardized protocol and established exclusion criteria CMR imaging could safely be performed in patients with a CIED. The potential risks of device malfunction necessitate the presence of a device trained individual during the entire CMR examination. If there is a history of VT storm the attendance of an experienced cardiologist, should be mandatory.