Advances in cardiovascular magnetic resonance in ischaemic heart disease and non-ischaemic cardiomyopathies

Heart

Volumn 100, Issue 21, 2014, Pages 1722-1733

  Motwani, Manish ^a   Kidambi, Ananth ^a   Greenwood, John P ^a   Plein, Sven ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEEDS   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CARDIOMYOPATHIES; DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS; HEART MUSCLE; HUMAN; MYOCARDIAL ISCHEMIA; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PATHOLOGY; PROCEDURES; REPRODUCIBILITY;

CARDIOMYOPATHIES; DIAGNOSIS, DIFFERENTIAL; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING, CINE; MYOCARDIAL ISCHEMIA; MYOCARDIUM; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS;

EID: 84897244108     PISSN: 13556037     EISSN: 1468201X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/heartjnl-2013-304680     Document Type: Review

References (30)

1. Bandettini WP, Arai AE. Advances in clinical applications of cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging. Heart 2008;94:1485-95.
2. Hundley WG, Bluemke DA, Finn JP, et al. ACCF/ACR/AHA/NASCI/SCMR 2010 expert consensus document on cardiovascular magnetic resonance: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Task Force on Expert Consensus Documents. Circulation 2010;121:2462-508. Expert consensus document summarising the current state of CMR and its clinical applications.
3. Bruder O, Wagner A, Lombardi M, et al. European Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (EuroCMR) registry-multinational results from 57 centers in 15 countries. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 2013;15:9. The EuroCMR registry seeks to evaluate indications, image quality, safety and impact on patient management of CMR in a multinational, multicentre setting. It is the largest registry of its kind and currently includes over 30, 000 patients.
4. Montalescot G, Sechtem U, Achenbach S, et al. 2013 ESC guidelines on the management of stable coronary artery disease: the Task Force on the management of stable coronary artery disease of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J 2013;34:2949-3003.
5. Fihn SD, Gardin JM, Abrams J, et al. 2012 ACCF/AHA/ACP/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS guideline for the diagnosis and management of patients with stable ischemic heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association task force on practice guidelines, and the American College of Physicians, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, Preventive Cardiovascular Nurses Association, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Circulation 2012;126:e354-471.
6. Yancy CW, Jessup M, Bozkurt B, et al. 2013 ACCF/AHA guideline for the management of heart failure: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on practice guidelines. Circulation 2013;128:e240-319.
7. McMurray JJ, Adamopoulos S, Anker SD, et al. ESC guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure 2012: The Task Force for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Acute and Chronic Heart Failure 2012 of the European Society of Cardiology. Developed in collaboration with the Heart Failure Association (HFA) of the ESC. Eur Heart J 2012;33:1787-847.
8. Greenwood JP, Maredia N, Younger JF, et al. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance and single-photon emission computed tomography for diagnosis of coronary heart disease (CE-MARC): a prospective trial. Lancet 2012;379:453-60. CE-MARC is the largest prospective study of CMR in IHD and showed a significantly greater overall diagnostic accuracy compared to SPECT for the detection of CAD.
9. Schwitter J, Wacker CM, Wilke N, et al. MR-IMPACT II: Magnetic resonance imaging for myocardial perfusion assessment in coronary artery disease trial: perfusion-cardiac magnetic resonance vs. single-photon emission computed tomography for the detection of coronary artery disease: a comparative multicentre, multivendor trial. Eur Heart J 2013;34:775-81. A large multicentre study, confirming the higher sensitivity of CMR compared to SPECT in patients with suspected CAD.
10. Motwani M, Jogiya R, Kozerke S, et al. Advanced cardiovascular magnetic resonance myocardial perfusion imaging: high-spatial resolution versus 3-dimensional whole-heart coverage. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging 2013;6:339-48. A comprehensive review of advanced stress perfusion CMR including high resolution and 3D whole heart techniques.
11. Plein S, Kozerke S, Suerder D, et al. High spatial resolution myocardial perfusion cardiac magnetic resonance for the detection of coronary artery disease. Eur Heart J 2008;29:2148-55.
12. Manka R, Paetsch I, Kozerke S, et al. Whole-heart dynamic three-dimensional magnetic resonance perfusion imaging for the detection of coronary artery disease defined by fractional flow reserve: determination of volumetric myocardial ischaemic burden and coronary lesion location. Eur Heart J 2012;33:2016-24.
13. Jogiya R, Kozerke S, Morton G, et al. Validation of dynamic 3-dimensional whole heart magnetic resonance myocardial perfusion imaging against fractional flow reserve for the detection of significant coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol 2012;60:756-65. The first study to validate 3D perfusion CMR against fractional flow reserve.
14. Motwani M, Maredia N, Fairbairn TA, et al. High-resolution versus standard-resolution cardiovascular magnetic resonance myocardial perfusion imaging for the detection of coronary artery disease. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging 2012;5:306-13.
15. Cheng AS, Pegg TJ, Karamitsos TD, et al. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance perfusion imaging at 3-tesla for the detection of coronary artery disease: a comparison with 1.5-tesla. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;49:2440-9.
16. Ebersberger U, Makowski MR, Schoepf UJ, et al. Magnetic resonance myocardial perfusion imaging at 3.0 Tesla for the identification of myocardial ischemia: comparison with coronary catheter angiography and fractional flow reserve measurements. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging 2013;14:1174-80.
17. Patel AR, Antkowiak PF, Nandalur KR, et al. Assessment of advanced coronary artery disease: advantages of quantitative cardiac magnetic resonance perfusion analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2010;56:561-9. A direct comparison of quantitative perfusion CMR and standard visual assessment.
18. Romero J, Kahan J, Kelesidis I, et al. CMR imaging for the evaluation of myocardial stunning after acute myocardial infarction: a meta-analysis of prospective trials. Eur Hear J Cardiovasc Imaging 2013;14:1080-91.
19. Kidambi A, Mather AN, Swoboda P, et al. Relationship between myocardial edema and regional myocardial function after reperfused acute myocardial infarction: an MR imaging study. Radiology 2013;267:701-8.
20. Viallon M, Mewton N, Thuny F, et al. T2-weighted cardiac MR assessment of the myocardial area-at-risk and salvage area in acute reperfused myocardial infarction: comparison of state-of-the-art dark blood and bright blood T2-weighted sequences. J Magn Reson Imaging 2012;35:328-39.
21. Matsumoto H, Matsuda T, Miyamoto K, et al. Peri-infarct zone on early contrast-enhanced CMR imaging in patients with acute myocardial infarction. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2011;4:610-18.
22. Eitel I, Kubusch K, Strohm O, et al. Prognostic value and determinants of a hypointense infarct core in T2-weighted cardiac magnetic resonance in acute reperfused ST-elevation myocardial infarction. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging 2011;4:354-62.
23. Roes SD, Borleffs CJ, van der Geest RJ, et al. Infarct tissue heterogeneity assessed with contrast-enhanced MRI predicts spontaneous ventricular arrhythmia in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy and implantable cardioverter-defibrillator. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging 2009;2:183-90.
24. Klem I, Shah DJ, White RD, et al. Prognostic value of routine cardiac magnetic resonance assessment of left ventricular ejection fraction and myocardial damage: an international, multicenter study. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging 2011;4:610-19. A large international, multicentre study involving 10 centres and over 1500 patients with known or suspected CAD. It showed that in addition to age and LVEF, the number of segments with hyperenhancement on LGE imaging was an independent predictor of mortality.
25. Klem I, Weinsaft JW, Bahnson TD, et al. Assessment of myocardial scarring improves risk stratification in patients evaluated for cardiac defibrillator implantation. J Am Coll Cardiol 2012;60:408-20.
26. Abbasi SA, Ertel A, Shah RV, et al. Impact of cardiovascular magnetic resonance on management and clinical decision-making in heart failure patients. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 2013;15:89.
27. Gulati A, Jabbour A, Ismail TF, et al Association of fibrosis with mortality and sudden cardiac death in patients with nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy. JAMA 2013;309:896-908. A large longitudinal study of over 400 patients with dilated cardiomyopathy. It showed that both the presence and extent of mid-wall hyperenhancement on LGE imaging were independently and incrementally associated with all-cause mortality.
28. Masci PG, Schuurman R, Andrea B, et al. Myocardial fibrosis as a key determinant of left ventricular remodeling in idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy: a contrast-enhanced cardiovascular magnetic study. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging 2013;6:790-9.
29. Flett AS, Hayward MP, Ashworth MT, et al. Equilibrium contrast cardiovascular magnetic resonance for the measurement of diffuse myocardial fibrosis: preliminary validation in humans. Circulation 2010;122:138-44. This study proposed a new technique utilising T1 mapping to directly quantify diffuse myocardial fibrosis. The technique was validated against surgical myocardial biopsy in patients with HCM or severe aortic stenosis.
30. Verhaert D, Thavendiranathan P, Giri S, et al. Direct T2 quantification of myocardial edema in acute ischemic injury. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2011;4:269-78.