Literature DB >> 22993217

Controversies in cardiovascular MR imaging: T2-weighted imaging should not be used to delineate the area at risk in ischemic myocardial injury.

Pierre Croisille1, Han W Kim, Raymond J Kim.   

Abstract

The use of T2-weighted MR imaging to delineate the area at risk and subsequently quantify myocardial salvage is problematic on many levels. The validation studies available thus far are inadequate. Unlike the data validating DE MR imaging, in which pathologic analysis has shown the precise shape and contour of the bright region exactly match the infarcted area, this level of validation does not exist for T2-weighted MR imaging. Technical advances have occurred, but image contrast between abnormal and normal regions remains limited, and in this situation, measured size differences between MR imaging data sets should not be overinterpreted. Moreover, with any T2 technique, there remains the key issue that there is no physiologic basis for the apparent T2 findings. Indeed, a homogeneously bright area at risk on T2-weighted MR images is incompatible with the known levels of edema that occur in infarcted and salvaged myocardium, and the finding that the lateral borders of T2 hyperintense regions frequently extend far beyond that of infarction is contrary to the wavefront phenomenon. Even if T2-weighted MR imaging provided an accurate measure of myocardial edema, the level of edema within the area at risk is dependent on multiple variables, including infarct size, age, reperfusion status, reperfusion injury, and therapies that could have an antiedema effect. The area at risk is a coronary perfusion territory. There is a fundamental limitation with defining the area at risk by using a nonperfusion-based indicator that can vary with different postreperfusion therapies. There are several applications for T2 myocardial imaging, including differentiation of acute from chronic MI and identification of acute myocarditis. On the basis of the currently available data; however, we conclude that T2-weighted MR imaging should not be used to delineate the area at risk in patients with ischemic myocardial injury.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22993217     DOI: 10.1148/radiol.12111769

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  33 in total

Review 1.  An overview on development and application of an experimental platform for quantitative cardiac imaging research in rabbit models of myocardial infarction.

Authors:  Yuanbo Feng; Jan Bogaert; Raymond Oyen; Yicheng Ni
Journal:  Quant Imaging Med Surg       Date:  2014-10

2.  T1 mapping as new diagnostic technique in a case of acute onset of biopsy-proven viral myocarditis.

Authors:  Julia Schumm; Simon Greulich; Udo Sechtem; Heiko Mahrholdt
Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol       Date:  2014-01-08       Impact factor: 5.460

Review 3.  Practical guidelines for rigor and reproducibility in preclinical and clinical studies on cardioprotection.

Authors:  Hans Erik Bøtker; Derek Hausenloy; Ioanna Andreadou; Salvatore Antonucci; Kerstin Boengler; Sean M Davidson; Soni Deshwal; Yvan Devaux; Fabio Di Lisa; Moises Di Sante; Panagiotis Efentakis; Saveria Femminò; David García-Dorado; Zoltán Giricz; Borja Ibanez; Efstathios Iliodromitis; Nina Kaludercic; Petra Kleinbongard; Markus Neuhäuser; Michel Ovize; Pasquale Pagliaro; Michael Rahbek-Schmidt; Marisol Ruiz-Meana; Klaus-Dieter Schlüter; Rainer Schulz; Andreas Skyschally; Catherine Wilder; Derek M Yellon; Peter Ferdinandy; Gerd Heusch
Journal:  Basic Res Cardiol       Date:  2018-08-17       Impact factor: 17.165

4.  Salvage assessment with cardiac MRI following acute myocardial infarction underestimates potential for recovery of systolic strain.

Authors:  Declan P O'Regan; Ben Ariff; A John Baksi; Fabiana Gordon; Giuliana Durighel; Stuart A Cook
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2012-11-24       Impact factor: 5.315

5.  Validation of contrast enhanced cine steady-state free precession and T2-weighted CMR for assessment of ischemic myocardial area-at-risk in the presence of reperfusion injury.

Authors:  Esben Søvsø Szocska Hansen; Steen Fjord Pedersen; Steen Bønløkke Pedersen; Hans Erik Bøtker; Won Yong Kim
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2019-03-09       Impact factor: 2.357

6.  The feasibility of imaging myocardial ischemic/reperfusion injury using (99m)Tc-labeled duramycin in a porcine model.

Authors:  Lei Wang; Feng Wang; Wei Fang; Steven E Johnson; Said Audi; Michael Zimmer; Thomas A Holly; Daniel C Lee; Bao Zhu; Haibo Zhu; Ming Zhao
Journal:  Nucl Med Biol       Date:  2014-09-23       Impact factor: 2.408

Review 7.  Cardioprotection and myocardial reperfusion: pitfalls to clinical application.

Authors:  Richard S Vander Heide; Charles Steenbergen
Journal:  Circ Res       Date:  2013-08-02       Impact factor: 17.367

Review 8.  Imaging the myocardial ischemic cascade.

Authors:  Arthur E Stillman; Matthijs Oudkerk; David A Bluemke; Menko Jan de Boer; Jens Bremerich; Ernest V Garcia; Matthias Gutberlet; Pim van der Harst; W Gregory Hundley; Michael Jerosch-Herold; Dirkjan Kuijpers; Raymond Y Kwong; Eike Nagel; Stamatios Lerakis; John Oshinski; Jean-François Paul; Riemer H J A Slart; Vinod Thourani; Rozemarijn Vliegenthart; Bernd J Wintersperger
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2018-03-19       Impact factor: 2.357

9.  Distinction of salvaged and infarcted myocardium within the ischaemic area-at-risk with T2 mapping.

Authors:  Sophia Hammer-Hansen; Martin Ugander; Li-Yueh Hsu; Joni Taylor; Jens Jakob Thune; Lars Køber; Peter Kellman; Andrew E Arai
Journal:  Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2014-05-07       Impact factor: 6.875

10.  Regional heterogeneity in cardiac sympathetic innervation in acute myocardial infarction: relationship with myocardial oedema on magnetic resonance.

Authors:  Alessia Gimelli; Pier Giorgio Masci; Riccardo Liga; Chrysanthos Grigoratos; Emilio Maria Pasanisi; Massimo Lombardi; Paolo Marzullo
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2014-05-13       Impact factor: 9.236

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.