OBJECTIVES: This study sought to evaluate performance characteristics of routine echo for left ventricular thrombus (LVT). BACKGROUND: Although the utility of dedicated echocardiography (echo) for LVT is established, echo is widely used as a general test for which LVT is rarely the primary indication. We used delayed-enhancement cardiac magnetic resonance (DE-CMR) as a reference to evaluate LVT detection by routine echo. METHODS: Dedicated LVT assessment using DE-CMR was prospectively performed in patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction. Echoes were done as part of routine clinical care. Echo and CMR were independently read for LVT and related indexes of LVT size, shape, and image quality/diagnostic confidence. Follow-up was done for embolic events and pathology validation of LVT. RESULTS: In this study, 243 patients had routine clinical echo and dedicated CMR within 1 week without intervening events. Follow-up supported DE-CMR as a reference standard, with >5-fold difference in endpoints between patients with versus without LVT by DE-CMR (p = 0.02). LVT prevalence was 10% by DE-CMR. Echo contrast was used in 4% of patients. Echo sensitivity and specificity were 33% and 91%, with positive and negative predictive values of 29% and 93%. Among patients with possible LVT as the clinical indication for echo, sensitivity and positive predictive value were markedly higher (60%, 75%). Regarding sensitivity, echo performance related to LVT morphology and mirrored cine-CMR, with protuberant thrombus typically missed when small (p ≤ 0.02). There was also a strong trend to miss mural thrombus irrespective of size (p = 0.06). Concerning positive predictive value, echo performance related to image quality, with lower diagnostic confidence scores for echoes read positive for LVT in discordance with DE-CMR compared with echoes concordant with DE-CMR (p < 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Routine echo with rare contrast use can yield misleading results concerning LVT. Echo performance is improved when large protuberant thrombus is present and when the clinical indication is specifically for LVT assessment.
OBJECTIVES: This study sought to evaluate performance characteristics of routine echo for left ventricular thrombus (LVT). BACKGROUND: Although the utility of dedicated echocardiography (echo) for LVT is established, echo is widely used as a general test for which LVT is rarely the primary indication. We used delayed-enhancement cardiac magnetic resonance (DE-CMR) as a reference to evaluate LVT detection by routine echo. METHODS: Dedicated LVT assessment using DE-CMR was prospectively performed in patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction. Echoes were done as part of routine clinical care. Echo and CMR were independently read for LVT and related indexes of LVT size, shape, and image quality/diagnostic confidence. Follow-up was done for embolic events and pathology validation of LVT. RESULTS: In this study, 243 patients had routine clinical echo and dedicated CMR within 1 week without intervening events. Follow-up supported DE-CMR as a reference standard, with >5-fold difference in endpoints between patients with versus without LVT by DE-CMR (p = 0.02). LVT prevalence was 10% by DE-CMR. Echo contrast was used in 4% of patients. Echo sensitivity and specificity were 33% and 91%, with positive and negative predictive values of 29% and 93%. Among patients with possible LVT as the clinical indication for echo, sensitivity and positive predictive value were markedly higher (60%, 75%). Regarding sensitivity, echo performance related to LVT morphology and mirrored cine-CMR, with protuberant thrombus typically missed when small (p ≤ 0.02). There was also a strong trend to miss mural thrombus irrespective of size (p = 0.06). Concerning positive predictive value, echo performance related to image quality, with lower diagnostic confidence scores for echoes read positive for LVT in discordance with DE-CMR compared with echoes concordant with DE-CMR (p < 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Routine echo with rare contrast use can yield misleading results concerning LVT. Echo performance is improved when large protuberant thrombus is present and when the clinical indication is specifically for LVT assessment.
Authors: Miguel A Quiñones; Pamela S Douglas; Elyse Foster; John Gorcsan; Jannet F Lewis; Alan S Pearlman; Jack Rychik; Ernesto E Salcedo; James B Seward; J Geoffrey Stevenson; Daniel M Thys; Howard H Weitz; William A Zoghbi; Mark A Creager; William L Winters; Michael Elnicki; John W Hirshfeld; Beverly H Lorell; George P Rodgers; Cynthia M Tracy; Howard H Weitz Journal: Circulation Date: 2003-02-25 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Nico R Mollet; Steven Dymarkowski; Wim Volders; Jurgen Wathiong; Lieven Herbots; Frank E Rademakers; Jan Bogaert Journal: Circulation Date: 2002-12-03 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Melvin D Cheitlin; William F Armstrong; Gerard P Aurigemma; George A Beller; Fredrick Z Bierman; Jack L Davis; Pamela S Douglas; David P Faxon; Linda D Gillam; Thomas R Kimball; William G Kussmaul; Alan S Pearlman; John T Philbrick; Harry Rakowski; Daniel M Thys; Elliott M Antman; Sidney C Smith; Joseph S Alpert; Gabriel Gregoratos; Jeffrey L Anderson; Loren F Hiratzka; Sharon Ann Hunt; Valentin Fuster; Alice K Jacobs; Raymond J Gibbons; Richard O Russell Journal: Circulation Date: 2003-09-02 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: James N Kirkpatrick; Tiffany Wong; James E Bednarz; Kirk T Spencer; Lissa Sugeng; R Parker Ward; Jeanne M DeCara; Lynn Weinert; Thomas Krausz; Roberto M Lang Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2004-04-21 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Jörg Barkhausen; Peter Hunold; Holger Eggebrecht; Walter O Schüler; Georg V Sabin; Raimund Erbel; Jörg F Debatin Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2002-12 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Anja Wagner; Heiko Mahrholdt; Thomas A Holly; Michael D Elliott; Matthias Regenfus; Michele Parker; Francis J Klocke; Robert O Bonow; Raymond J Kim; Robert M Judd Journal: Lancet Date: 2003-02-01 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Thomas C Crawford; William T Smith; Eric J Velazquez; Steve M Taylor; James G Jollis; Joseph Kisslo Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2004-02-15 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: M D Ezekowitz; D A Wilson; E O Smith; R D Burow; L H Harrison; D E Parker; R C Elkins; M Peyton; F B Taylor Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1982-06-24 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Pratik S Velangi; Christopher Choo; Ko-Hsuan A Chen; Felipe Kazmirczak; Prabhjot S Nijjar; Afshin Farzaneh-Far; Osama Okasha; Mehmet Akçakaya; Jonathan W Weinsaft; Chetan Shenoy Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2019-11-11 Impact factor: 7.792
Authors: Jonathan W Weinsaft; Jiwon Kim; Chaitanya B Medicherla; Claudia L Ma; Noel C F Codella; Nina Kukar; Subhi Alaref; Raymond J Kim; Richard B Devereux Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2015-10-14
Authors: Jiwon Kim; Sara Rodriguez-Diego; Aparna Srinivasan; Rachel-Maria Brown; Meridith P Pollie; Antonino Di Franco; Samantha R Goldburg; Jonathan Y Siden; Mark B Ratcliffe; Robert A Levine; Richard B Devereux; Jonathan W Weinsaft Journal: Echocardiography Date: 2017-08-22 Impact factor: 1.724
Authors: Wieland Staab; Leonard Bergau; Andreas Schuster; Rocio Hinojar; Marc Dorenkamp; Silvia Obenauer; Joachim Lotz; Christian Sohns Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2014-01-03 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Jürgen Leick; Sebastian Szardien; Christoph Liebetrau; Matthias Willmer; Ulrich Fischer-Rasokat; Jörg Kempfert; Holger Nef; Andreas Rolf; Thomas Walther; Christian Hamm; Helge Möllmann Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2013-04-14 Impact factor: 5.460
Authors: Nicolas Palaskas; Kara Thompson; Gregory Gladish; Ali M Agha; Saamir Hassan; Cezar Iliescu; Peter Kim; Jean B Durand; Juan C Lopez-Mattei Journal: Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med Date: 2018-03-20