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

Review and critical appraisal of the indications for cardiac magnetic resonance imaging in the ESC guidelines

Cardiac MRI has made significant advances in the past decade, becoming an important technique for the evaluation of various cardiac pathologies. The aim of this document is to review the current indications for performing cardiac MRI based on the current ESC guidelines for STEMI, NSTEMI, chronic coronary artery disease, heart failure, arrhythmias, sudden cardiac death, valvular heart disease, pericardial disease and congenital heart disease. The review discusses the diagnostic and prognostic value of cMR for numerous cardiac diseases, and its important value in assessing structural heart disease and predicting arrhythmia risk. Additionally, it reflects upon the appropriateness of the guidelines and points out areas where the indications should be revised in future editions, based on the author's personal opinion. It is suggested that guideline criteria for the use of cMR should be more explicit to promote its use and lead to more specific reimbursements. However, further studies are needed to even better document the value of cMR in the future.

Impact of wideband cardiac magnetic resonance on diagnosis, decision-making and outcomes in patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators

AIMS

Although myocardial scar assessment using late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging is frequently indicated for patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs), metal artefact can degrade image quality. With the new wideband technique designed to mitigate device related artefact, CMR is increasingly used in this population. However, the common clinical indications for CMR referral and impact on clinical decision-making and prognosis are not well defined. Our study was designed to address these knowledge gaps.

METHODS AND RESULTS

One hundred seventy-nine consecutive patients with an ICD (age 59 ± 13 years, 75% male) underwent CMR using cine and wideband pulse sequences for LGE imaging. Electronic medical records were reviewed to determine the reason for CMR referral, whether there was a change in clinical decision-making, and occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs). Referral indication was the most common evaluation of ventricular tachycardia (VT) substrate (n = 114, 64%), followed by cardiomyopathy (n = 53, 30%). Overall, CMR resulted in a new or changed diagnosis in 64 (36%) patients and impacted clinical management in 51 (28%). The effect on management change was highest in patients presenting with VT. A total of 77 patients (43%) experienced MACE during the follow-up period (median 1.7 years), including 65 in patients with evidence of LGE. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed that ICD patients with LGE had worse outcomes than those without LGE (P = 0.006).

CONCLUSION

The clinical yield from LGE CMR is high and provides management changing and meaningful prognostic information in a significant proportion of patients with ICDs.

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.

2021 - State of our JCMR

There were 89 articles published in the Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (JCMR) in 2020, including 71 original research papers, 5 technical notes, 6 reviews, 4 Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (SCMR) position papers/guidelines/protocols and 3 corrections. The volume was up 12.7% from 2019 (n = 79) with a corresponding 17.9% increase in manuscript submissions from 369 to 435. This led to a slight increase in the acceptance rate from 22 to 23%. The quality of the submissions continues to be high. The 2020 JCMR Impact Factor (which is published in June 2020) slightly increased from 5.361 to 5.364 placing us in the top quartile of Society and cardiac imaging journals. Our 5 year impact factor increased from 5.18 to 6.52. Fourteen years ago, the JCMR was at the forefront of medical and medical society journal migration to the Open-Access format. The Open-Access system has dramatically increased the availability and citation of JCMR publications with accesses now exceeding 1.2 M! It takes a village to run a journal. JCMR is blessed to have a group of very dedicated Associate Editors, Guest Editors, Journal Club Editors, and Reviewers. I thank each of them for their efforts to ensure that the review process occurs in a timely and responsible manner. These efforts have allowed the JCMR to continue as the premier journal of our field. My role, and the entire process would not be possible without the dedication and efforts of our new managing editor, Jennifer Rodriguez, whose premier organizational efforts have allowed for streamlining of the review process and marked improvement in our time-to-decision (see later). As I begin my 6th and final year as your editor-in-chief, I thank you for entrusting me with the JCMR editorship. I hope that you will continue to send us your very best, high quality manuscripts for JCMR consideration and that our readers will continue to look to JCMR for the very best/state-of-the-art CMR publications. The editorial process continues to be a tremendously fulfilling experience and the opportunity to review manuscripts that reflect the best in our field remains a great joy and true highlight of my week!