Literature DB >> 28228308

Systematic review of non-invasive cardiovascular imaging in the diagnosis of constrictive pericarditis.

Sivakumar Ardhanari1, Bharath Yarlagadda1, Vishal Parikh2, Kevin C Dellsperger3, Anand Chockalingam1, Sudarshan Balla1, Senthil Kumar4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Diagnosis of constrictive pericarditis (CP) can be challenging. It can be nearly impossible to distinguish CP from other causes of right heart failure. Although various imaging modalities help in the diagnosis, no test is definitive. Several reviews have addressed the role of various imaging techniques in the diagnosis of CP but a systematic review has not yet been published.
OBJECTIVE: Our intention was to study the ability of various non-invasive imaging modalities to diagnose CP in patients with surgically confirmed disease and to apply our findings to develop a clinically useful diagnostic algorithm.
METHODS: A PubMed (NLM) search was performed with MeSH term "constrictive pericarditis". Original articles that investigated the ability of various cardiovascular imaging modalities to noninvasively diagnose surgically confirmed CP were included in our review. Investigations that included any cases without surgical confirmation were excluded.
RESULTS: The PubMed search yielded 3001 results with MeSH term "constrictive pericarditis" (January 8, 2016). We identified (40) studies on CP that matched our inclusion criteria. We summarized our results sorted by individual non-invasive CV imaging modalities - echocardiography, cardiac computed tomography (CT), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Under each imaging modality, we grouped our discussion based on different parameters useful in CP diagnosis.
CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, contemporary diagnosis of CP is based on clinical features and echocardiography. Cardiac MRI is recommended in patients where echocardiography is not diagnostic. Both cardiac MRI and CT can guide surgical planning but we prefer MRI as it provides both structural and functional information.
Copyright © 2016. Published by Elsevier B.V.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cardiac computed tomography; Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging; Cardiovascular imaging; Constrictive pericarditis; Echocardiography

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 28228308      PMCID: PMC5318986          DOI: 10.1016/j.ihj.2016.06.004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Indian Heart J        ISSN: 0019-4832


Introduction

Constrictive pericarditis (CP) is characterized by focal or global scarring and loss of elasticity of the pericardium with or without associated thickening. The abnormal pericardium impedes diastolic filling causing elevated systemic venous pressures. This causes right heart failure that classically manifests as lower extremity edema, ascites, and poor effort tolerance. However, the clinical features are not unique making the diagnosis challenging. Restrictive cardiomyopathy (RCM) is a close clinical mimic as it also causes impaired ventricular filling resulting in similar clinical presentation. It is imperative to resolve this diagnostic dilemma because patients with CP can be effectively cured with pericardiectomy. The evaluation of CP includes detailed clinical history and examination, echocardiogram, cardiac catheterization, cardiac computerized tomography (CT), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Several recent reviews have addressed this topic.1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 However, a systematic review has not yet been published.

Methods

PubMed (NLM) search was performed with MeSH term “constrictive pericarditis”. Original investigations that involved imaging diagnosis of CP were included in our review. The diagnosis of CP had to be confirmed based on surgical findings and pathology in all patients. Case reports, studies performed exclusively in children (age < 18 years), and publications in languages other than English were excluded. We excluded studies on effusive-constrictive pericarditis and constrictive epicarditis.

Results

The PubMed search yielded 3001 results with MeSH term “constrictive pericarditis” (January 8, 2016). We identified 40 original investigations published between 1978 and 2015 that studied a total of 1244 patients (76% males and age range 19 months to 87 years). An etiology was reported for 1073 patients; of these, CP was idiopathic in 297 patients (28%). When a cause was identified, the etiology of CP included surgery (232 patients, 22%), tuberculosis (231 patients, 21%), radiation (87 patients, 8%), viral (40 patients, 4%), and miscellaneous causes (186 patients, 17%) that included infection, inflammation, trauma, malignancy, collagen vascular disease, and myocardial infarction. Surgical and pathological findings (pericardial thickening, fibrosis, adhesions, calcification, bulging of the heart out of the pericardial incision at pericardiectomy) were reported only in a few studies – 6 echocardiography studies,9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 3 MRI studies,15, 16, 17 and 4 CT studies.9, 11, 18, 19 We summarized our results sorted by individual non-invasive CV imaging modalities – echocardiography, cardiac computed tomography (CT), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) (Table 1, Table 2, Table 3). Under each imaging modality, we grouped our discussion based on various structural and functional alterations induced by CP – pericardial thickness, motion of pericardium and myocardium, constrictive physiology, septal bounce, chamber geometry, and vascular dilatation.
Table 1

Original investigations for diagnosis of CP in surgically confirmed patients – Echocardiography. COPD = chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; CP = constrictive pericarditis; E = early mitral inflow velocity; e′ = early diastolic mitral annular velocity; LV = left ventricle; NA = not available; NPV = negative predictive value; PPV = positive predictive value; RCM = restrictive cardiomyopathy; S′ = systolic mitral annular velocity; SD = standard deviation; TB = tuberculosis. Data for pericardial thickness, e′ and S′ were rounded to nearest whole number.

Echocardiography
Year; AuthornMean age ± SD (range)Male/femaleComparison groups with nEtiology of constrictive pericarditis with nParameter/cutoffSensitivitySpecificity
2014; Welch3913062 ± 12107/23RCM or severe tricuspid regurgitation 36Idiopathic/collagen vascular disease/prior pericarditis 77; Surgery 39; Radiation 141. Respiration related ventricular septal shift (PPV 92, NPV 74)9369
2. Medial mitral e′ ≥ 9 (PPV 92, NPV 57)8381
3. Hepatic vein expiratory diastolic reversal ratio ≥0.79 (PPV 96, NPV 49)7688
1 + (2 or 3)8791
All 36497
Annulus paradoxus, i.e. Lower E/e′ ratios at the medial mitral annulus in patients with CP (5.8; CI 3.6 to 9.3) vs. patients without CP (16.1; CI 11.6–21.2, p < 0.001)
2011; Veress539958 ± 1572/27NoneIdiopathic 33; Surgery 34; Radiation 13; Other 19Annulus reversus (medial e′ > lateral e′, reverse of normal) present in 74% of patients with CP
2010; Butz243458 ± 1218/16RCM 26Surgery 13; Radiation 3; Unknown 18RCM vs. CP: S′ 4 vs. 7 cm/s; septal e′ 4 vs. 13 cm/s; lateral e′ 5 vs. 11 cm/s
S′ < 8 cm/s and e′ < 8 cm/s for RCM9388
2009; Lu30203311/9Normal 20TB 10; Surgery 2; Unknown 8Quantitative tissue Doppler (R = D3 − D2/D2 − D1. D1 systolic peak displacement of pericardium; D2 outer myocardium; D3 inner myocardium); R > 1.29085
R = 5 ± 4.7 in CP; 0.6 ± 0.7 in normal; p < 0.05
2008; Sengupta31265616/10RCM 19; Normal 21Surgery 5; Radiation 8; Viral 5; Idiopathic 8Significantly reduced circumferential strain, torsion and early diastolic untwisting velocities (Er) in CP; significantly reduced longitudinal displacement (Em) in RCM
Torsion <10°8384
Er > −50°/s5795
Em > 5 cm/s9290
2008; Sengupta26166213/3RCM 15Surgery 7; Radiation 2; Idiopathic 7e′ averaged from all 4 walls (>6.6 cm/s)9393
e′ averaged from all 4 walls >5 cm/s correctly distinguished CP from RCM
2005; Sengupta134024 ± 1224/16Normal 35; Abnormal septal motion due to other causes 20TB 26; Pyogenic 2; Radiation 2; Unknown 10Higher septal e′ velocity (>7 cm/s) and early diastolic biphasic motion of interventricular septum in CP8393
2004; Ha252359 (27–87)21/2Amyloid 38; Primary RCM 14Surgery 8; Unknown 15e′ ≥ 8 cm/s in CP9596
2004; Sengupta414524 ± 1224/21Normal 35; RCM 11; Right heart failure 20; Chronic pericardial effusion 11TB 26; Pyogenic 2; Radiation 2; Idiopathic 15e′ > 8 cm/s in 40/45 with CP, 8/20 with right heart failure, all with Chronic pericardial effusion. e′ < 8 cm/s in 8/11 with RCM
Using combined e′, E, M mode and 2D echo8995
2003; Talreja9143(12–82)108/35NoneSurgery 40; Radiation 21; MI 12; Trauma 2; Collagen vascular disease 11; Viral 17; Other infection 7; Renal failure 1; Other 13; Idiopathic 39 (some had more than one etiology)Echocardiography diagnostic of CP (PPV 53)
Abnormal septal motion (PPV 49)
Atrial enlargement (PPV 61)
Thickened pericardium (PPV 37)
2002; Ha271957 ± 1317/2NoneSurgery 6; Unknown 13Normal mitral annular velocity (mean 12 ± 4) even in patients without respiratory variation in mitral inflow velocity (9 of 19 patients)100
2002; Izumi10757 ± 56/1NonePericarditis 3; TB 1; Surgery 2; Idiopathic 1Thickened pericardium over right atrium in 6/7 patients but none over LV in esophageal views but in 7/7 patients over LV in transgastric view
2001; Ha281064 (54–72)8/2NoneSurgery 4; Idiopathic 6Inverse correlation between E/e′ and LV filling pressures in patients with CP; Mean e′ was 11 ± 4 cm/s (range, 7–21 cm/s). Pulmonary capillary wedge pressure and LV end diastolic pressure were 25 ± 6 and 27 ± 6 mmHg
2000; Palka231057 ± 147/3RCM 15; Normal 30Idiopathic 4; Surgery 4; Radiation 1; Malignancy 1Doppler myocardial velocity gradient measured from left ventricular posterior wall was lower in RCM during ventricular ejection (RCM 2.8 ± 1.2 vs. CP 4.4 ± 1.0 vs. Normal controls 4.7 ± 0.8 s−1; p < 0.01) and during rapid ventricular filling (RCM 1.9 ± 0.8 vs. CP 8.7 ± 1.7 vs. normal controls 3.7 ± 1.4 s−1).Doppler myocardial velocity gradient was positive in RCM and negative in CP and normal controls during isovolumic relaxation (+0.7 ± 0.4 vs. −1.0 ± 0.6 vs. −0.4 ± 0.3 s−1; p < 0.01)
1998; Boonyaratevej332058 ± 1219/1COPD 20Idiopathic 9; Viral 5; Surgery 4; Trauma 1; Rheumatoid arthritis 1Respiratory variation in mitral E velocity was 41% (compared to COPD 46%)
Respiratory variation in SVC systolic flow velocity was 4 ± 3 cm/s (compared to COPD 40 ± 19 cm/s); p < 0.0001
1997; Ling111153 ± 1511/0Normal 21Irradiation 2; Idiopathic 4; Post-CABG 4; Myelodysplastic syndrome 1Pericardial thickness ≥3 mm (PPV 88, NPV 94)9586
1997; Oh351260 (47–73)10/2NoneNARespiratory variation in mitral E velocity after decreasing preload in patients with constriction who do not exhibit the typical respiratory change; The mean percent respiratory change in E velocity was 5 ± 7% at baseline and 32 ± 28% with preload reduction
1996; Klodas38568 (61–76)5/0Heart failure due to other causes 12Surgery 1; Idiopathic 4Tricuspid regurgitation peak velocity, duration and VTI increased with inspiration in CP but decreased in controls
1994; Mantri403327 ± 17 (2.5–62)21/12RCM 8; Normal 33NALeft atrial dilatation in CP and RCM
1994; Oh352855 ± 1521/7CP 25; RCM 1; Normal 2Idiopathic 8; Surgery 6; Radiation 3; TB 1; Rheumatoid arthritis 1; Unknown 6E velocity ≥25% increase with expiration.Hepatic vein flow – augmented diastolic flow reversals after onset of expiration ≥25% of forward diastolic velocity)88
1989; D’Cruz22761 ± 37/0Normal 23; HCM 13NAAngle formed by junction of LV and left atrial posterior walls in parasternal long axis view by 2D echocardiography <150° in 5/7 with CP vs. none in normal subjects and HCM
1989; Hatle32752 ± 11NARCM 12; Normal 12Unknown 3; Surgery 2; Radiation 2Respiratory variation in left ventricular isovolumic relaxation time
Early mitral flow (E) velocity >25% in CP vs. <15% in RCM
1983; Janos144(9–67)NA3 RCM; 39 NormalTB 2; Surgery 2Very rapid early filling in CP vs. prolonged mid diastolic filling in RCM
1978; Schnittger1237NANANoneNAAbnormal septal and posterior wall motion; high E–F slope
Table 2

Original investigations for diagnosis of CP in surgically confirmed patients – Computerized tomography. CP = constrictive pericarditis; CT = computerized tomography; LV = left ventricle; NA= not available; NPV = negative predictive value; PPV = positive predictive value; RCM = restrictive cardiomyopathy; SD = standard deviation. Data for pericardial thickness were rounded to nearest whole number. *Age and sex reported for 238 patients that includes 26 patients excluded from study.

Year; AuthornAge ± SD (range)Male/femaleComparison groups with nEtiology of constrictive pericarditis with nParameter/cutoff
2008; Kloeters435515/0Dilated cardiomyopathy with CorCap 10; Normal 10Infection 2; Collagen vascular disease 2; Unknown 1Significantly accelerated LV and right ventricular filling; Significantly increased pericardial thickness 5 ± 1 vs. 1 mm by electron beam CT
2003; Talreja9143(12–82)108/35NoneSurgery 40; Radiation 21; Myocardial infarction 12; Trauma 2; Collagen vascular disease 11; Viral 17; Other infection 7; Uremia 1; Other 13; Idiopathic 39 (some had more than one etiology)CT diagnostic of CP (PPV 68)
Thickened pericardium (PPV 72)
Abnormal ventricular morphology (PPV 31)
Calcified pericardium (PPV 25)
1997; Ling111153 ± 1511/0Normal 21Radiation 2; Idiopathic 4; Surgery 4; Myelodysplastic syndrome 1Pericardial thickness measured by electron beam CT correlated well with transesophageal echocardiography and pathology measurements
1993; Oren19562 ± 7NACardiomyopathy with normal pericardium 7; Normal 7Radiation 1; Surgery 1; Idiopathic 3Using cine CT, pericardial thickness 10 ± 2 mm in CP vs. 2 ± 1 mm in cardiomyopathy with normal pericardium vs. 1 ± 1 mm in normal (p < 0.05 for CP vs. no CP)
Left ventricular filling fraction was 83 ± 6% in CP vs. 62 ± 9% in cardiomyopathy vs. 44 ±v5% in normal
Right ventricular filling fraction 93 ± 5% in CP vs. 62 ±v14% in cardiomyopathy vs. 35 ± 6% in normal (p < 0.05 CP vs. no CP
1992; Suchet18186(19 months–78 years)*174/64*NoneTB 157; Radiation 2; Malignancy 2; Sarcoidosis 1; Surgery 2; Post pericardiectomy 1, idiopathic 21Pericardial thickness ≥3 mm in all patients with CP; Inferior venacava dilation 97%; abnormal ventricular morphology 31%; deviation of interventricular septum 15%
Table 3

Original investigations for diagnosis of CP in surgically confirmed patients – Magnetic resonance imaging. CP = constrictive pericarditis; LV = left ventricle; NA = not available; NPV = negative predictive value; PPV = positive predictive value; RCM = restrictive cardiomyopathy; RV = right ventricle; SD = standard deviation; TB = tuberculosis. Data for pericardial thickness were rounded to nearest whole number. * Age and sex information includes 7 patients without CP or RCM.

Magnetic resonance imaging
Year; AuthornAge ± SD (range)Male/femaleComparison groups with nEtiology of constrictive pericarditis with nParameter/cutoffSensitivitySpecificity
2015; Power4816NANA2NAAbsence of slippage between visceral and parietal pericardium on radiofrequency tissue tagging was diagnostic of CP. PPV, NPV 100%100100
2015; Bolen174255 ± 1639/321 patients without CPIdiopathic 22; Surgery 10; Viral 3; Radiation 2; Others 5Pericardial thickness 3.1 ± 2.5 mm83100
Relative interventricular septal excursion 11.4 ± 8.7%9395
Both parameters combined10090
SVC and IVC size >2.6 cm5595
Diastolic septal bounce9085
Ventricular interdependence88100
LV area change 17.7 ± 24.1%86100
RV area change 26.4 ± 9%5786
2015; Angheloiu521162 ± 147/411 normal volunteersNACompression of RV in 4 chamber view (1 − RV surface area/Cardiac surface area) (0.88 ± 0.03 in CP vs. 0.85 ± 0.03, p = 0.02)8282
Angle between tricuspid valve annulus plane and interventricular septum (81 ± 9 in CP vs. 91 ± 7, p = 0.01)7391
Impact angle between tricuspid inflow vector and septum (8.6 ± 8.7 in CP vs. 0 ± 6.6, p = 0.01)7391
Proportion of tricuspid inflow impacting septum (0.38 ± 0.19 in CP vs. 0.01 ± 0.03, p < 0.0001)100100
2013; Anavekar511762 ± 16NA35 patients without CPNABiventricular end diastolic area in inspiration/expiration = 1 in CP vs. 1.28 in those without CP
2013; Kusunose495259 ± 1446/6RCM 35; Normal 26Radiation 2; TB 1; Surgery 10; Idiopathic 39LV lateral wall strain/LV septal wall strain 0.8 in CP vs. 1.1 in RCM and 1 in Normal. Cutoff <0.968696
RV free wall strain/LV septal wall strain 0.8 in CP vs. 1.4 in RCM and 1.2 in Normal. Cutoff <0.977685
2011; Cheng152343 (15–77)18/5RCM 22; Normal 25Unknown 10; Surgery 4; TB 7; Inflammatory/infection 2Relative atrial volume ratio >1.32 (left/right atrial volume)8386
Diastolic septal bounce96100
Pericardial thickness CP 4–12 mm; normal and RCM 1–3 mm; p < 0.001
2012; Young455259 ± 1343/9Chronic recurrent pericarditis 16; Other pericardial pathology 8Surgery 13, Radiation 6; Idiopathic 18; Viral 10; Autoimmune 3; Trauma 2; Others 2 (includes 2 with overlapping chronic recurrent pericarditis and CP)Mean IVC diameter 3.1 ± 0.4 cm
Pericardial thickness 9.2 ± 7.0 mm with calcification; 4.6 ± 2.1 mm without calcification in CP
Abnormal septal motion 86% in CP
Pericardial enhancement in CP 76% vs. Chronic recurrent pericarditis 94%
2010; Bauner442252 ± 12 (41–70)18/4Normal 20Surgery 11; Radiation 3; Inflammatory 2; Unknown 6Abnormal septal motion 21/22 in CP vs. 0/20 in Normal96100
RV volume reduced in CP ≤ 133 ml7790
Tricuspid early filling/atrial component reduced in CP ≤ 1.37795
Pericardial thickness ≥4 mm 17/22 in CP vs. 0/20 in Normal91100
All 4 parameters8390
2006; Francone1618639/9Normal 17; Inflammatory pericarditis 6; RCM 15NAVentricular coupling (max. septal excursion with respiration 11.8%); Significantly increased max. pericardial thickness 8 ± 6 mm vs. 2 ± 1 mm normal vs. RCM 3 ± 2 mm vs. Inflammatory pericarditis 12 ± 4 mm
2005; Francone50647 ± 103/3Normal 6; RCM 4; Chronic pulmonary embolism/Cor pulmonale 5; Pericardial effusion 6NAIn all CP patients, onset of inspiration lead to a leftward inversion/flattening of the septum during early ventricular filling
2003; Giorgi462163 (21–79)24/17*RCM 13; Normal 12NAAbnormal diastolic septal motion (PPV 100, NPV 83)81100
Pericardial thickening in 21/21 CP patients (mean thickness 7 mm) vs. 1/13 RCM patients

Echocardiography

Pericardial thickness

Transthoracic echocardiography has limited accuracy to assess pericardial thickness and was present in only 37% of CP patients; transesophageal echocardiography is superior but is rarely performed for this indication alone.10, 11

Motion of the pericardium and the myocardium

By echocardiography, pericardial adhesion may be evident as thickened, parallel, adherent pericardial layers that are pulled together during systole. Pericardial tethering and restricted posterior wall motion are commonly reported in patients with CP.12, 22, 23 Tissue Doppler (TD) echocardiography measures low velocity Doppler signals from myocardial motion during early diastole and systole denoted as e′ and S′ respectively. Conventionally, the myocardial velocities are measured from samples placed at the mitral annulus at the septal or medial and lateral walls.

Early diastolic myocardial velocity (e′)

In normal subjects, early diastolic myocardial velocities (e′) sampled at the lateral wall tend to be higher than the velocities measured at the septal wall. Mitral “annulus reversus” is the reversal of the normal relationship of higher lateral to lower medial e′ velocities reported in 74% of patients with CP (Fig. A, Fig. B). This is related to the tethering of the lateral wall by pericardium unlike the septal wall. Mitral “annulus reversus” is unique to CP and is not present in RCM.
Fig. A

Tissue Doppler echocardiography showing 10 cm/s medial e′ velocity.

Fig. B

Tissue Doppler echocardiography showing lateral e′ velocity of 5 cm/s (same patient as Fig. A). There is reversal of the normal relationship of higher lateral to lower medial e′ velocities in this patient with surgically proven CP (annulus reversus).

RCM being a myocardial disease tends to have lower TD velocities in contrast to CP and normal subjects. Butz et al. reported septal e′ velocity of 13 cm/s in CP vs. 4 cm/s in RCM and lateral e′ velocity of 11 cm/s in CP vs. 5 cm/s in RCM. Ha et al. reported that a cutoff for e′ > 8 cm/s can be used to differentiate CP from RCM (Fig. A). Sengupta et al reported a lower cutoff of 5 cm/s for mean e′ of the 4 LV walls to differentiate CP from RCM without overlap. Mitral e′ has also been shown useful, even in the absence of expected respiratory variation in early rapid filling (E) velocity. Interestingly, an inverse correlation exists between E/e′ and left ventricular (LV) filling pressures in patients with CP (annulus paradoxus) compared to direct correlation in primary myocardial disease such as RCM; this was also confirmed by the same group of researchers in a subsequent study. However, a recent report could not reproduce the finding of annulus paradoxus in 49 patients with surgically confirmed CP.

Systolic mitral annular velocity (S′)

Butz et al. reported systolic mitral annular velocity (S′) velocity of 7 cm/s in CP vs. 4 cm/s in RCM. A combination of average septal and lateral wall systolic (S′) velocity of <8 cm/s and e′ velocity of <8 cm/s had a 93% sensitivity and 88% specificity in excluding CP. Several other echocardiography techniques show promise for CP diagnosis. Myocardial velocity gradient quantifies spatial distribution of intramural velocities across the myocardium and another technique to express the differences in myocardial motion between CP and RCM. Myocardial velocity gradient was lower in RCM during ventricular ejection and rapid ventricular filling compared to CP and normal controls. Myocardial velocity gradient was positive in RCM and negative in CP and normal controls during isovolumic relaxation. Lu et al. showed that in normal subjects, the motion of the myocardium was greater than that of the pericardium, but the motion of the outer and inner-layers of the myocardium were almost exactly the same. However, in patients with CP, the outer-layer myocardium had far reduced motion similar to the pericardium, while the motion of the inner-layer myocardium was stronger than that of the outer-layer myocardium. This study was able to quantify this difference with the equation ([D3 − D2]/[D2 − D1]) through 2D echocardiography and quantitative tissue Doppler imaging (where D1 is the systolic peak displacement of pericardium; D2 displacement of outer myocardium; D3 displacement of inner myocardium). Strain imaging by echocardiography was reported to be useful in differentiating CP from RCM. CP is characterized by reduced circumferential strain, torsion and untwisting velocity but normal longitudinal strain. In RCM, there is reduced longitudinal strain but normal circumferential strain. This is due to the fact that subendocardial fibers (predominantly responsible for longitudinal shortening) are more affected in RCM and subepicardial fibers (predominantly responsible for circumferential shortening) in CP.

Ventricular interdependence

Abnormal early diastolic filling is a prominent feature of both CP and RCM; the findings that favor CP include rapid early LV filling, shorter duration of rapid filling period, and reduced peak LV filling rate.14, 20 An earlier study reported increased E–F slope on M mode echocardiography (mitral valve early diastolic closing velocity) in patients with CP. Doppler echocardiography can be used to differentiate CP from RCM based on respiratory changes in transvalvular flow velocities (Fig. C, Fig. D). Hatle et al. reported significant changes in left ventricular isovolumic relaxation time (IVRT) and in early mitral and tricuspid flow velocities at onset of inspiration and expiration in CP, but not in RCM or normal subjects. Respiratory variation in early mitral flow (E) velocity was >25% in CP (Fig. C) vs. <15% in RCM; the respiratory variation in these parameters normalized after pericardiectomy in patients with CP.32, 33, 34
Fig. C

Pulse wave Doppler echocardiography showing respiratory variation in early mitral flow (E) velocity of >25% in CP confirmed by surgery.

Fig. D

Pulse wave Doppler echocardiography showing respiratory variation in early tricuspid flow (E) velocity.

“Occult CP” is an entity in patients with strong suspicion for CP without diagnostic features of constriction by imaging attributed to variations in loading conditions. Altering preload can help bring out constrictive physiology in these patients. Preload reduction can demonstrate ventricular interdependence in those who do not have the typical respiratory change in mitral E velocity at baseline (presumed to be due to volume overload). The mean percent respiratory change in E velocity was 5 ± 7% at baseline and 32 ± 28% with preload reduction. Conversely, in volume depleted patients, hemodynamic measurements may have to be repeated after a fluid load to establish the diagnosis of CP. Patients with CP on mechanical ventilation showed reversal of the expected physiologic variations in mitral inflow and pulmonary vein flow parameters attributed to the changes in the intrathoracic pressures. Unlike patients with other causes of heart failure, those with CP show increased peak velocity and duration of tricuspid regurgitation during inspiration. Respiratory variation in superior vena cava (SVC) flow was useful in differentiating CP vs. chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (4 ± 3 cm/s in CP vs. 40 ± 19 cm/s in COPD). Augmented late systolic as well as diastolic flow reversals after onset of expiration in hepatic vein flow have been shown to have a high specificity for CP (Fig. E) compared to RCM.34, 39 It has also been shown that in patients with CP, SVC systolic flow is decreased, absent, or reversed, but in diastole, forward flow is increased with increased late backflow.
Fig. E

Pulse wave Doppler echocardiography showing arrows pointing toward expiratory diastolic flow reversals in the hepatic veins.

Septal bounce is a commonly used term to describe the abnormal beat to beat diastolic septal motion in patients with CP. Visually, it is appreciated as a shudder or oscillatory motion (leading to the term septal bounce). It is likely another manifestation of ventricular interdependence when the observation of septal motion is not limited to inspiration and also impacted by events of the cardiac cycle.9, 12, 13, 39 The presence of septal bounce had a sensitivity of 62% and specificity of 93% for diagnosis of CP.

Chamber geometry and vascular dilatation

Atrial enlargement was reported in 61% patients with CP.8, 9, 40 Dilated IVC and hepatic veins with blunted respiratory variation are commonly seen in patients with right heart failure including CP.

Combination of findings

In a study of 34 patients, Butz et al. reported that a combination of average septal and lateral wall systolic (S′) velocity of <8 cm/s and e′ velocity of <8 cm/s had a 93% sensitivity and 88% specificity in ruling out CP. Combination of Doppler (E, e′), M-mode, and 2D echocardiographic parameters had 89% sensitivity and 95% specificity for CP diagnosis.

Computerized tomography

CT provides excellent visualization of the pericardium (Fig. F). Suchet et al. demonstrated increased pericardial thickness of ≥3 mm in all patients with CP. In one study, 72% of patients with CP had thickened pericardium by CT; in addition, calcified pericardium was found in 25%. Using cine CT, pericardial thickness was 10 ± 2 mm in CP, 2 ± 1 mm in RCM, and 1 ± 1 mm in normal controls (p < 0.05 for CP vs. no CP). Overall, CT is recognized as an excellent tool to determine pericardial thickness and the most sensitive technique to identify pericardial calcification.
Fig. F

CT showing thickened pericardium (arrow) in surgically confirmed CP.

In an earlier study with cine CT, the rapidity of diastolic filling (assessed by calculating the percent filling fraction in early diastole) was increased for both LV and RV in patients with CP. Kloeters et al. used electron beam CT demonstrating an abnormal rapid diastolic left and right ventricular filling and thickened pericardium in patients with CP compared to patients with either dilated cardiomyopathy or normal subjects. The findings from the above studies need to be replicated using multi-slice CT scanners as electron beam CT is no longer used in clinical practice. CT is not very sensitive in detection of abnormal ventricular morphology and interventricular septal deviation, which were found in 31% and 15% of patients with CP respectively; however, IVC dilation is almost universal in CP and was reported in 97% of patients.9, 18

Magnetic resonance imaging

In a study by Cheng et al., the maximal pericardial thickness in CP (Fig. G, Fig. H) was significantly greater than controls and RCM patients (4–12 mm in CP vs. 1–3 mm in controls and RCM; p < 0.001). In another study, pericardial thickness >4 mm was present in 17 out of 22 patients with CP compared to none of the 20 normal controls. A threshold of pericardial thickness >3–4 mm yielded a sensitivity and specificity of 83–91% and 100% to diagnose CP.17, 44
Fig. G

Cardiac MRI cine showing thickened pericardium (arrow). The pericardium is thickened (5 mm in maximum thickness) circumferentially that was correlated to surgical findings.

Fig. H

Cardiac MRI dark blood images showing thickened pericardium (arrow).

Pericardium tends to be thicker in patients with calcification as was reported in a recent study. Pericardial thickness was 9.2 ± 7.0 mm with calcification and 4.6 ± 2.1 mm without calcification. Giorgi et al. found that abnormal focal or diffuse pericardial thickening was noted in 21 out of 21 patients with CP with a mean thickness of 7.1 mm compared to only 1 out of 13 patients with RCM. In a study by Lachhab et al, the average thickness of pericardium was 8 mm in patients with CP and the thickening was circumferential in 64% and localized in 36%; more importantly, the assessment of pericardial thickness using MRI showed 100% concordance with surgical findings.

Motion of pericardium and myocardium

Pericardial adhesions can be visualized directly by cine MRI and myocardial tagging. Application of MRI tag lines in a grid-like pattern over a certain imaged slice allows for the study of the deformation of the grid over time. Absence of slippage between visceral and parietal pericardium on radiofrequency tissue tagging was diagnostic of CP with sensitivity and specificity of 100%. Kusunose et al. demonstrated abnormal myocardial mechanics in patients with CP by assessment of myocardial strain using MRI. They reported a depressed LV lateral wall and RV free wall strain with preserved LV septal wall strain in patients with CP. A ratio of LV lateral wall strain to septal wall strain of <0.96 had a sensitivity and specificity of 86% and 96% respectively for diagnosis of CP; similarly, a ratio of RV free wall strain to septal wall strain <0.97 had a sensitivity and specificity of 76% and 85% respectively. These findings are consistent with prior echocardiography literature on the similar parameters. Presence of ventricular interdependence (septal shift toward left during inspiration) using real-time cine MRI in the short-axis plane (Fig. I and Cine 2) had 81–88% sensitivity, 100% specificity, 90% accuracy, 100% positive predictive value (PPV), and 83% negative predictive value in the diagnosis of CP.16, 17 Also, a septal shift cutoff of 11.8% of the biventricular diameter was able to completely differentiate CP from RCM and normal subjects. In a recent study, similar cutoff of 11.4 ± 8.7% had a sensitivity and specificity of 93% and 95% respectively. This finding was best seen in the base of the ventricle and in the first heartbeat after inspiration. An earlier study also compared the utility of this technique in differentiating CP from other entities with septal shift: (1) cor pulmonale – septal shift was present but respiration did not change the septal position; (2) pericardial effusion – septal shift was also present in 1 of 6 patients but pericardial effusion can be readily diagnosed; and (3) normal volunteers – septal shift was found in two of six normal volunteers but minimal compared to that in CP patients. Ventricular interdependence was demonstrated by Anavekar et al. using the ratio of biventricular end diastolic area in inspiration to expiration; this ratio was 1 in CP compared to 1.28 in those without CP (p < 0.0001). Similar to echocardiography, MRI can also demonstrate increased early ventricular filling and decreased or absent late filling using velocity-encoded phase contrast MRI or plotting ventricular volumes against time when visualized on a four-chamber or short-axis cine image field.
Fig. I

Cardiac MRI showing leftward shift of the interventricular septum (arrow) during inspiration, which is consistent with ventricular interdependence in a patient with ascites and leg edema that resolved after pericardiectomy.

The presence of septal bounce has been reported almost universally by MRI in patients with CP with a sensitivity and specificity of 90–96% and 85–100% respectively.15, 17, 44, 45 By detailed analysis of interaction between cardiac blood flow and septal motion, 4 newer parameters for CP diagnosis were reported. Patients with CP compared to controls had significantly greater compression of RV, lesser angle between the tricuspid valve annulus plane and the interventricular septum, greater impact angle between the tricuspid inflow vector and septum and higher proportion of tricuspid inflow impacting the septum. Patients with CP had reduced RV volume; compared to normal controls, a RV volume of <133 ml had a sensitivity and specificity of 77% and 90% respectively for diagnosis of CP. LV area change 17.7 ± 24.1% had a sensitivity and specificity of 86% and 100% respectively; RV area change 26.4 ± 9% had a sensitivity and specificity of 57% and 86% respectively. Cheng et al. recently demonstrated that CP could be differentiated from RCM by precise quantification of biatrial enlargement. The relative atrial volume ratio (left atrium volume/right atrium volume) was significantly greater in CP patients versus those with RCM. This can be explained by the fact that the posterior wall of the left atrium is actually anatomically separated from the pericardial space and so it expands greater than the right atrium in patients with CP, whereas in patients with RCM, both atria expand an equal amount. IVC dilatation is a common finding in CP patients with one study reporting IVC diameter of 3.1 ± 0.4 cm. In a recent study, SVC and IVC size >2.6 mm had a sensitivity and specificity of 55% and 95% respectively.

Discussion

CP is usually suspected either due to symptoms of right heart failure or pericardial thickening noted during chest imaging. The available evidence suggests CT and MRI as the best methods to accurately measure pericardial thickness. Normal pericardial thickness is usually 1–2 mm based on gross pathology data. Pericardial thickness >3–4 mm by either CT or MRI will usually warrant further assessment for CP. The diagnosis of CP is strengthened greatly if the pericardium is diffusely rather than focally thickened. While pericardial thickness is a very useful parameter in diagnosis of CP, constriction with normal-thickness pericardium has been well recognized. In one study, 18% of patients had constrictive physiology with a normal-thickness noncompliant pericardium. Since these patients will also benefit from pericardiectomy, lack of pericardial thickening should not be used to exclude CP. Based on our systematic review, we generated an algorithm incorporating echocardiography, cardiac MRI, and CT that can be useful for diagnosis of CP (Fig. J). Echocardiography is an essential first step for patients presenting with findings of CP such as peripheral edema and ascites. The combination of respiration related interventricular septal shift and either medial mitral e′ velocity >9 cm/s or hepatic vein expiratory diastolic reversal ratio >0.79 had a sensitivity of 87% and specificity of 91% for diagnosis of CP. Using all 3 findings as diagnostic criteria increased the specificity to 97% but lowered sensitivity to 64%. Alternatively, a cutoff of 5 cm/s for mean e′ of the 4 LV walls correctly distinguished CP from RCM without overlap. Due to sensitivities >90%, absence of respiratory ventricular septal shift or reduced mitral annular e′ (<9 cm/s) can be used to exclude CP.25, 39 Echocardiography is also very useful in identifying differential diagnoses such as restrictive cardiomyopathy, dilated cardiomyopathy, valve disease, or significant pulmonary hypertension. Table 4 summarizes the distinguishing features of constrictive pericarditis from restrictive cardiomyopathy.
Fig. J

Diagnostic algorithm for CP.

Table 4

Distinguishing features between constrictive pericarditis and restrictive cardiomyopathy seen on imaging.

Constrictive pericarditisRestrictive cardiomyopathy
Pericardial thickeningAlmost universalAbsent
Annulus reversusPresentAbsent
e′, S′, respiratory variation in E velocityHigherLower
Ventricular interdependence and septal bouncePresentAbsent
Hepatic vein diastolic flow reversal in expirationPresentAbsent
Left atrial to right atrial volume ratioHigherLower
If echocardiography is not definitive (poor image quality or equivocal findings), cardiac MRI would be the next logical step. Cardiac MRI provides structural and functional data and is preferred over cardiac CT. Pericardial thickness ≥3 mm and respiratory septal excursion ≥12% in combination have a sensitivity and specificity of 100% and 90% respectively. Therefore, the absence of both these findings will definitively rule out CP. Novel parameters with high sensitivities and specificities have been described (items a, b, and c in Fig. J), which may need further validation. In future, with widespread adoption of volume criteria and strain imaging, we anticipate their routine use in clinical practice. Even if echocardiography is confirmatory for CP, cardiac MRI or CT can still be useful for surgical planning. Table 5 summarizes and compares the ability of the different imaging modalities in identifying the various diagnostic findings of constrictive pericarditis.
Table 5

Summary and comparison of findings by various imaging modalities in the assessment of constrictive pericarditis.

FindingsEchocardiographyCTMRI
Pericardial thickness and calcificationTTE has limited accuracy, TEE superior• Best modality to assess for pericardial calcification• Useful for the assessment of entire pericardium and surgical planningUseful for the assessment of entire pericardium and surgical planning
Motion of the pericardium and the myocardium• Higher e′ and S′ help differentiate CP from RCM• Annulus reversus – unique to CPLimited ability to assess physiology• Myocardial tagging technique -high diagnostic accuracy
Ventricular interdependence and septal bounce• Higher respiratory variation in E velocity seen in CP vs. RCM• Augmented diastolic hepatic vein flow reversal highly specific for CP• Septal bounce present in CP but not RCMLimited ability to assess pathophysiology• Septal shift easier to demonstrate with MRI than Echo• Septal bounce reported almost universally• Velocity encoded phase contrast MRI to detect respiratory variation in E velocity – inferior in temporary resolution to Doppler echocardiography
Chamber geometry and venous dilationDilated atria, IVC and hepatic veins seen both in CP and RCMSimilar to Echo• Chamber volume quantification superior to Echo• Left atrial to right atrial volume ratio higher in CP vs. RCM

Limitations

Since CP is a relatively rare diagnosis, most of the available literature is based on small single center studies. Although the diagnostic utility of numerous techniques such as strain imaging (echocardiography) and atrial volumes (MRI) have been elegantly demonstrated, these are yet to be adopted in many imaging laboratories. Most studies stated that surgical and pathological findings were used to confirm CP diagnosis but the exact criteria were reported only in a few studies.

Conclusion

In most patients, contemporary diagnosis of CP is based on clinical features and echocardiography. Cardiac MRI is recommended in patients where echocardiography is not diagnostic. Both cardiac MRI and CT can guide surgical planning but we prefer MRI due to its ability to provide both structural and functional information.

Conflicts of interest

The authors have none to declare.
  53 in total

1.  Evaluation of left and right ventricular diastolic function by electron-beam computed tomography in patients with passive epicardial constraint.

Authors:  Christian Kloeters; Simon Dushe; Pascal M Dohmen; Henning Meyer; Lasse D Krug; Kay G A Hermann; Bernd Hamm; Wolfgang F Konertz; Alexander Lembcke
Journal:  J Comput Assist Tomogr       Date:  2008 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 1.826

2.  CT in tuberculous constrictive pericarditis.

Authors:  I B Suchet; T A Horwitz
Journal:  J Comput Assist Tomogr       Date:  1992 May-Jun       Impact factor: 1.826

3.  Index of biventricular interdependence calculated using cardiac MRI: a proof of concept study in patients with and without constrictive pericarditis.

Authors:  Nandan S Anavekar; Benjamin F Wong; Thomas A Foley; Kalkidan Bishu; Arunark Kolipaka; Chi Wan Koo; Masud H Khandaker; Jae K Oh; Phillip M Young
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2012-07-21       Impact factor: 2.357

4.  Magnetic resonance characterization of septal bounce: findings of blood impact physiology.

Authors:  George O Angheloiu; Geetha Rayarao; Ronald Williams; June Yamrozik; Mark Doyle; Robert W W Biederman
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2014-09-30       Impact factor: 2.357

5.  Differentiation of constrictive pericarditis and restrictive cardiomyopathy by Doppler echocardiography.

Authors:  L K Hatle; C P Appleton; R L Popp
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  1989-02       Impact factor: 29.690

6.  Preload reduction to unmask the characteristic Doppler features of constrictive pericarditis. A new observation.

Authors:  J K Oh; A J Tajik; C P Appleton; L K Hatle; R A Nishimura; J B Seward
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  1997-02-18       Impact factor: 29.690

7.  Reversal of the pattern of respiratory variation of Doppler inflow velocities in constrictive pericarditis during mechanical ventilation.

Authors:  I A Abdalla; R D Murray; H E Awad; W J Stewart; J D Thomas; A L Klein
Journal:  J Am Soc Echocardiogr       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 5.251

Review 8.  Constrictive pericarditis in 26 patients with histologically normal pericardial thickness.

Authors:  Deepak R Talreja; William D Edwards; Gordon K Danielson; Hartzell V Schaff; A Jamil Tajik; Henry D Tazelaar; Jerome F Breen; Jae K Oh
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2003-09-29       Impact factor: 29.690

9.  Cardiac magnetic resonance radiofrequency tissue tagging for diagnosis of constrictive pericarditis: A proof of concept study.

Authors:  John A Power; Diane V Thompson; Geetha Rayarao; Mark Doyle; Robert W W Biederman
Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2015-12-21       Impact factor: 5.209

10.  Clinically suspected constrictive pericarditis: MR imaging assessment of ventricular septal motion and configuration in patients and healthy subjects.

Authors:  Benedetta Giorgi; Nico R A Mollet; Steven Dymarkowski; Frank E Rademakers; Jan Bogaert
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2003-06-11       Impact factor: 11.105

View more
  4 in total

Review 1.  Echocardiographic Differentiation of Pericardial Constriction and Left Ventricular Restriction.

Authors:  Hardeep Kaur Grewal; Manish Bansal
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2022-08-30       Impact factor: 3.955

2.  Transthoracic Echocardiography: Beginner's Guide with Emphasis on Blind Spots as Identified with CT and MRI.

Authors:  Matthew D Grant; Ryan D Mann; Scott D Kristenson; Richard M Buck; Juan D Mendoza; Jason M Reese; David W Grant; Eric A Roberge
Journal:  Radiographics       Date:  2021-06-11       Impact factor: 6.312

3.  A New High-Performance Gadonanotube-Polymer Hybrid Material for Stem Cell Labeling and Tracking by MRI.

Authors:  Sakineh E Moghaddam; Mayra Hernández-Rivera; Nicholas G Zaibaq; Afis Ajala; Maria da Graça Cabreira-Hansen; Saghar Mowlazadeh-Haghighi; James T Willerson; Emerson C Perin; Raja Muthupillai; Lon J Wilson
Journal:  Contrast Media Mol Imaging       Date:  2018-07-10       Impact factor: 3.161

Review 4.  A Systematic Review of COVID-19 and Pericarditis.

Authors:  Pramod Theetha Kariyanna; Ahmed Sabih; Bayu Sutarjono; Kanval Shah; Alvaro Vargas Peláez; Jeremy Lewis; Rebecca Yu; Ekjot S Grewal; Apoorva Jayarangaiah; Sushruth Das; Amog Jayarangaiah
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2022-08-12
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.