OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence and importance of extracardiac findings (ECF) in patients undergoing clinical CMR and to test the hypothesis that the original CMR reading focusing on the heart may underestimate extracardiac abnormalities. METHODS: 401 consecutive patients (mean age 53 years) underwent CMR at 1.5 T. Main indications were ischaemic heart disease (n = 183) and cardiomyopathy (n = 164). All CMR sequences, including scout images, were reviewed with specific attention to ECF in a second reading by the same radiologist who performed the first clinical reading. Potentially significant findings were defined as abnormalities requiring additional clinical or radiological follow-up. RESULTS: 250 incidental ECF were detected, of which 84 (34%) had potentially significant ECF including bronchial carcinoma (n = 1), lung consolidation (n = 7) and abdominal abnormalities. In 166 CMR studies (41%) non-significant ECF were detected. The number of ECF identified at second versus first reading was higher for significant (84 vs. 47) and non-significant (166 vs. 36) findings (P < 0.00001). CONCLUSIONS: About one fifth of patients undergoing CMR were found to have potentially significant ECF requiring additional work-up. The second dedicated reading detected significantly more ECF compared with the first clinical reading emphasising the importance of active search for extracardiac abnormalities when evaluating CMR studies. KEY POINTS: • Many patients undergoing cardiac MR have significant extracardiac findings (ECF) • These impact on management and require additional work-up. • Wide review of scout and cine sequences will detect most ECFs. • Education of radiologists is important to identify ECFs on CMR studies.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence and importance of extracardiac findings (ECF) in patients undergoing clinical CMR and to test the hypothesis that the original CMR reading focusing on the heart may underestimate extracardiac abnormalities. METHODS: 401 consecutive patients (mean age 53 years) underwent CMR at 1.5 T. Main indications were ischaemic heart disease (n = 183) and cardiomyopathy (n = 164). All CMR sequences, including scout images, were reviewed with specific attention to ECF in a second reading by the same radiologist who performed the first clinical reading. Potentially significant findings were defined as abnormalities requiring additional clinical or radiological follow-up. RESULTS: 250 incidental ECF were detected, of which 84 (34%) had potentially significant ECF including bronchial carcinoma (n = 1), lung consolidation (n = 7) and abdominal abnormalities. In 166 CMR studies (41%) non-significant ECF were detected. The number of ECF identified at second versus first reading was higher for significant (84 vs. 47) and non-significant (166 vs. 36) findings (P < 0.00001). CONCLUSIONS: About one fifth of patients undergoing CMR were found to have potentially significant ECF requiring additional work-up. The second dedicated reading detected significantly more ECF compared with the first clinical reading emphasising the importance of active search for extracardiac abnormalities when evaluating CMR studies. KEY POINTS: • Many patients undergoing cardiac MR have significant extracardiac findings (ECF) • These impact on management and require additional work-up. • Wide review of scout and cine sequences will detect most ECFs. • Education of radiologists is important to identify ECFs on CMR studies.
Authors: Jeffrey G Schragin; Joel L Weissfeld; Daniel Edmundowicz; Diane C Strollo; Carl R Fuhrman Journal: J Thorac Imaging Date: 2004-04 Impact factor: 3.000
Authors: Raymond J Kim; Albert de Roos; Eckart Fleck; Charles B Higgins; Gerald M Pohost; Martin Prince; Warren J Manning Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Date: 2007 Impact factor: 5.364
Authors: Peter G Chan; Martin P Smith; Thomas H Hauser; Susan B Yeon; Evan Appelbaum; Neil M Rofsky; Warren J Manning Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2009-08
Authors: Carsten Oliver Schmidt; Katrin Hegenscheid; Pia Erdmann; Thomas Kohlmann; Martin Langanke; Henry Völzke; Ralf Puls; Heinrich Assel; Reiner Biffar; Hans Jörgen Grabe Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2012-12-13 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Maryam Ghadimi Mahani; Ajaykumar C Morani; Jimmy C Lu; Soudabeh Fazeli Dehkordy; Sunil Jeph; Adam L Dorfman; Prachi P Agarwal Journal: Pediatr Radiol Date: 2016-01-11
Authors: Jan M Sohns; Jan Menke; Alexander Schwarz; Leonard Bergau; Johannes T Kowallick; Andreas Schuster; Frank Konietschke; Marius Placzek; Desiree Weiberg; Stefan Nordlohne; Sebastian Schmuck; Sebastian Schulz; Thorsten Derlin; Wieland Staab Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2017-04-27 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Felix C Sokolowski; Philipp Karius; Alejandra Rodríguez; Alexander Lembcke; Moritz Wagner; Bernd Hamm; Marc Dewey Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2018-04-30 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Vincent Dunet; Heloise Barras; Xavier Boulanger; Pierre Monney; Salah D Qanadli; Reto Meuli; Juerg Schwitter; Catherine Beigelman-Aubry Journal: Med Sci Monit Date: 2015-05-06
Authors: Jonathan C L Rodrigues; Stephen M Lyen; William Loughborough; Antonio Matteo Amadu; Anna Baritussio; Amardeep Ghosh Dastidar; Nathan E Manghat; Chiara Bucciarelli-Ducci Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Date: 2016-05-09 Impact factor: 5.364