| Literature DB >> 32418537 |
Viktoria Holtstiege1, Claudia Meier1, Michael Bietenbeck1, Grigorios Chatzantonis1, Anca Florian1, Julia Köbe2, Florian Reinke2, Lars Eckardt2, Ali Yilmaz3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) studies in patients with implanted cardioverter/defibrillators (ICD) are increasingly required in daily clinical practice. However, the clinical experience regarding the feasibility as well as clinical value of CMR studies in patients with subcutaneous ICD (S-ICD) is still limited. Besides safety issues, image quality and analysis can be impaired primarily due the presence of image artefacts associated with the generator.Entities:
Keywords: Cardiovascular magnetic resonance; Implanted cardioverter/defibrillator; Late gadolinium enhancement; Wide band
Year: 2020 PMID: 32418537 PMCID: PMC7232845 DOI: 10.1186/s12968-020-00626-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson ISSN: 1097-6647 Impact factor: 5.364
Sequence parameters; either automatic or volume shim was performed. For (b)SSFP sequences a SENSE factor of 2 was used
| Flip angle in ° | Spatial resolution in mm | Receiver bandwidth | TR / TE in msec | Inversion bandwidth in Hz | Acquisition time in sec | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| bSSFP | 60 | 1.8 × 2.0 × 8 | 954 | 3.3 / 1.6 | 5.5 | |
| SSFP | 15 | 2.0 × 2.6 × 8 | 1033 | 5.3 / 3.1 | 8.5 | |
| LGE | 25 | 1.6 × 2.3 × 10 | 1055 | 6.1 / 3.0 | 1000 | 10.0 |
| wb-LGE | 25 | 1.6 × 2.3 × 10 | 1055 | 6.2 / 3.0 | 4000 | 10.0 |
bSSFP balanced steady state free precession; LGE late gadolinium enhancement; wb-LGE wide band
Baseline patient characteristics
| Parameter | Value |
|---|---|
| Age, years | 48 ± 12 |
| Gender male/female, n (%) | 13 (57%) / 10 (43%) |
| Height, cm | 179 ± 9 |
| Weight, kg | 87 ± 18 |
| BMI, kg/m2 | 27 ± 4 |
| BSA, m2 | 2.0 ± 0.2 |
| NYHA class I / II / III / IV, n (%) | 11 (48%) / 5 (22%) / 3 (13%) / 0 (0%) |
| Indication for S-ICD implantation, n (%) | |
| Suspected non-ischemic cardiomyopathy with LVEF ≤35% | 5 (22%) |
| Suspected ischemic cardiomyopathy with LVEF ≤35% | 1 (4%) |
| Ventricular arrhythmia of unknown origin | 17 (74%) |
| Primary vs. secondary prophylaxis, n (%) | 8 (35%) vs. 15 (65%) |
BMI body mass index; S-ICD subcutaneous implanted cardioverter/defibrillator; LVEF left ventricular ejection fraction
Device characteristics and safety issues
| Parameter | Value |
|---|---|
| MR-conditional, n (%) | 23 (100%) |
| S-ICD device model A 209, n (%) | 23 (100%) |
| Electrode model, n (%) | |
| 3401 | 12 (52%) |
| 3501 | 9 (39%) |
| 3010 | 2 (9%) |
| Safety issues associated with CMR, n (%) | |
| Death | 0 (0%) |
| Device replacement | 0 (0%) |
| Electrical reset | 0 (0%) |
| Change of impedance | 0 (0%) |
| Change in battery voltage | 0 (0%) |
| VT/VF/hemodynamic instability | 0 (0%) |
| PVC during CMR | 8 (35%) |
| Loss of device alarm | 12 (52%) |
MR magnetic resonance; PVC premature ventricular complex; VF ventricular fibrillation; VT ventricular tachycardia
CMR pulse-sequence details and image quality assessment
| Parameter | Value |
|---|---|
| Used type of cine-sequence | |
| Steady-state free precession (SSFP), n (%) | 9 (39%) |
| Spoiled gradient echo (GRE), n (%) | 23 (100%) |
| Artefacts in cine images after optimization, n (%) | |
| No artefacts / no limitation | 0 (0%) |
| Good image quality with limited artefacts | 17 (74%) |
| Poor image quality with substantial artefacts | 5 (22%) |
| Image assessment impossible due to extensive artefacts | 1 (4%) |
| Used type of LGE-sequence | |
| Conventional inversion-recovery LGE-sequence, n (%) | 22 (96%) |
| Modified wide-band LGE-sequence, n (%) | 20 (87%) |
| Artefacts in LGE images after optimization | |
| No artefacts / no limitation | 0 (0%) |
| Good image quality with limited artefacts | 13 (56%) |
| Poor image quality with substantial artefacts | 10 (44%) |
| Image assessment impossible due to extensive artefacts | 0 (0%) |
| Artefact minimization by additional use of wide-band LGE, n (%) | 15 (65%) |
| Artefact minimization by changing phase encoding direction, n (%) | 9 (39%) |
| T2-weighted edema imaging, n (%) | 23 (100%) |
| Artefacts in T2-weighted edema images, n (%) | |
| No artefacts / no limitation | 1 (4%) |
| Good image quality with limited artefacts | 15 (65%) |
| Poor image quality with substantial artefacts | 7 (30%) |
| Image assessment impossible due to extensive artefacts | 0 (0%) |
| Velocity-encoded phase-contrast imaging of aortic flow, n (%) | 21 (91%) |
| Artefacts in phase-contrast aortic flow images, n (%) | |
| No artefacts / no limitation | 14 (61%) |
| Good image quality with limited artefacts | 7 (30%) |
| Poor image quality with substantial artefacts | 0 (0%) |
| Image assessment impossible due to extensive artefacts | 0 (0%) |
| Myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) at rest, n (%) | 16 (70%) |
| Artefacts in resting perfusion images, n (%) | |
| No artefacts / no limitation | 1 (4%) |
| Good image quality with limited artefacts | 7 (30%) |
| Poor image quality with substantial artefacts | 5 (22%) |
| Image assessment impossible due to extensive artefacts | 3 (13%) |
| 3D-CMR angiography of the aorta, n (%) | 15 (65%) |
| Artefacts in 3D-CMR angiography images, n (%) | |
| No artefacts / no limitation | 14 (61%) |
| Good image quality with limited artefacts | 1 (4%) |
| Poor image quality with substantial artefacts | 0 (0%) |
| Image assessment impossible due to extensive artefacts | 0 (0%) |
Fig. 1Chest x-ray of a patient carrying both, a conventional device (pacemaker (yellow)) and an S-ICD (red)
Fig. 2Cine-cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) images in a patient with ischemic cardiomyopathy and extensive anterior scar illustrating the extent of the generator artefact. Balanced steady-state free precession (bSSFP)-based cine-images in a left ventricular (LV) 2-chamber (a), 3-chamber (b) and 4-chamber view (c) with artefacts in the inferolateral and apical wall segments. After switching to spoiled gradient echo (GRE)-based cine-CMR the aforementioned artefacts disappeared completely in this patient without any relevant artefact in the region of interest
Fig. 3Bulls-eye plot visualizing average artefact distribution in cine-CMR (a) and late gadolinium enhancement (LGE)-CMR (b) images (grey scale with white color = excellent assessability and black = very poor assessability)
Fig. 4Hyperintensity artefact (red arrow) suggesting an epicardial scar in the anterolateral wall segment (a) in a patient without LGE as shown in the same view after image optimisation by the wide-band LGE (wb-LGE) technique (d). Hyperintensity artefact suggesting an ischemic pattern of myocardial damage in the inferolateral wall (b, red arrow); disappearance of this artefact and unmasking of an epicardial LGE using the wb-LGE technique (e, blue arrow). Minimization of the hyperintensity artefact in the inferolateral wall segments (c, red arrow) by inspiration and unmasking of an intramural LGE (f, blue arrow)
Fig. 5Examples of short-axis views of T2-weighted images (a-b) without any relevant device artefact in the region of interest. Artefact-free anatomic (c) and phase-contrast flow images (d) of the aortic valve performed to assess aortic flow by velocity encoding (VENC) CMR. Short-axis perfusion images at different time-points with illustrating substantial image artefacts in the anterolateral and inferolateral wall segments that preclude a valid visual assessment in these segments (e-g). Example of an artefact-free reconstruction of 3D-CMR angiography of the thoracic aorta (H)
CMR findings
| Parameter | Value |
|---|---|
| Left ventricular CMR findings | |
| LVEF, % | 58 ± 10% |
| LV EDV, ml | 197 ± 68 |
| LV ESV, ml | 90 ± 52 |
| LV mass, g | 162 ± 42 |
| Right ventricular CMR findings | |
| RVEF, % | 58 ± 9% |
| RV EDV, ml | 180 ± 49 |
| RV ESV, ml | 77 ± 32 |
| LGE findings (after image optimization), n (%) | |
| No LGE | 6 (26%) |
| Presence of LGE with ischemic pattern | 1 (4%) |
| Presence of LGE with non-ischemic pattern | 16 (70%) |
| Extent of LGE, no. of segments | 3 ± 3 |
| Extent of LGE, % of total myocardial mass | 20 ± 17% |
| CMR-based final diagnosis, n (%) | |
| Ischemic cardiomyopathy | 1 (4%) |
| Non-ischemic cardiomyopathy | 14 (61%) |
| Myocarditis/inflammatory cardiomyopathy | 5 (22%) |
| Normal CMR findings/non-conclusive CMR | 3 (13%) |
EDV end-diastolic volume; ESV end-systolic volume; RV right ventricular; RVEF right ventricular ejection fraction
Value of CMR findings in clinical decision-making
| Parameter | Value |
|---|---|
| Benefit from CMR for clinical decision-making, n (%) | |
| Yes | 17 (74%) |
| No | 6 (26%) |
| Details of clinical decision-making based on CMR findings, n (%) | |
| Conclusive diagnosis of underlying cardiac disease in so far unclear condition | 8 (35%) |
| Change in previously suspected cardiac diagnosis | 3 (13%) |
| Identification of myocardial scar location for targeted ablation | 1 (4%) |
| Change in cardiac medication | 2 (9%) |
| Targeted genetic analysis based on CMR findings | 2 (9%) |
| Additional cardiac work-up in family members due to CMR findings | 2 (9%) |
| Optimized scheduling of cardiac follow-up studies | 7 (30%) |
| Targeted endomyocardial biopsy based on CMR findings | 3 (13%) |