| Literature DB >> 34988125 |
Maxwell D Eder1, Krishna Upadhyaya1,2, Jakob Park3, Matthew Ringer4, Maricar Malinis4, Bryan D Young1, Lissa Sugeng1, David J Hur1.
Abstract
Infective endocarditis is a common and treatable condition that carries a high mortality rate. Currently the workup of infective endocarditis relies on the integration of clinical, microbiological and echocardiographic data through the use of the modified Duke criteria (MDC). However, in cases of prosthetic valve endocarditis (PVE) echocardiography can be normal or non-diagnostic in a high proportion of cases leading to decreased sensitivity for the MDC. Evolving multimodality imaging techniques including leukocyte scintigraphy (white blood cell imaging), 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET), multidetector computed tomographic angiography (MDCTA), and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMRI) may each augment the standard workup of PVE and increase diagnostic accuracy. While further studies are necessary to clarify the ideal role for each of these imaging techniques, nevertheless, these modalities hold promise in determining the diagnosis, prognosis, and care of PVE. We start by presenting a clinical vignette, then evidence supporting various modality strategies, balanced by limitations, and review of formal guidelines, when available. The article ends with the authors' summary of future directions and case conclusion.Entities:
Keywords: endocarditis (infectious); endocarditis team; imaging; multimodality; prosthetic; valve
Year: 2021 PMID: 34988125 PMCID: PMC8720921 DOI: 10.3389/fcvm.2021.750573
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Cardiovasc Med ISSN: 2297-055X
Overview of imaging modalities in the detection of prosthetic valve endocarditis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TTE | • Non-invasive | • Limited sensitivity in PVE | • Sensitivity for NVE 50–90% | • Useful and cost effective first line test for suspected IE |
| TEE | • Improved sensitivity over TTE for NVE and PVE | • Semi-invasive | • Sensitivity for NVE of 90–100% | • Appropriate second test if TTE is negative or inconclusive and clinical suspicion remains high |
| Leukocyte Scintigraphy | • High specificity for infection | • Decreased sensitivity for detection of vegetations | • Sensitivity for IE 64–90% Specificity for IE 100% | • Useful test when high specificity is desired or for examining extracardiac manifestations of IE |
| FDG-PET | • High sensitivity in PVE | • Lower specificity—non-infectious inflammation can lead to false positives | • Sensitivity for IE 73–100% | • Useful test to follow a non-diagnostic TEE when clinical suspicion for PVE remains high |
| MDCTA | • Provides detailed anatomic data on coronary vasculature and valvular anatomy which can aid in perioperative planning | • Limited ability to detect valve perforations and dehiscence | • Sensitivity for IE 93–100% | • May be ideal when both diagnostic and perioperative anatomic data are needed |
| CMRI | • Provides highly detailed anatomic and functional data | • Not well-studied for detection of IE and limited data on ideal application | • Limited data | • Further data is needed to clarify the role of this rapidly evolving modality |
CMRI, cardiac magnetic resonance imaging; FDG-PET, .
Imaging modalities and infective endocarditis guidelines.
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
| TTE | • TTE is recommended as the first line imaging modality in suspected IE (class I, level of evidence B) | • In patients with suspected IE, TTE is recommended to identify vegetations, characterize the hemodynamic severity of valvular lesions, assess ventricular function and pulmonary pressures, and detect complications (class I, level of evidence B-NR) |
| TEE | • TEE is recommended in all patients with a clinical suspicion of IE and a negative or non-diagnostic TTE (class I, level of evidence B) | • In all patients with known or suspected IE and non-diagnostic TTE results, when complications have developed or are clinically suspected or when intracardiac device leads are present, TEE is recommended (class I, level of evidence B-NR) |
| Leukocyte Scintigraphy | • Leukocyte scintigraphy should be preferred in situations that require increased specificity given the modality is more specific for the detection of IE and infectious foci than FDG-PET | • No specific recommendation |
| FDG-PET | • Advantages of FDG-PET include reducing the rate of misdiagnosed IE by reducing those classified as possible IE via the Duke criteria and detection of metastatic and peripheral infections or embolic events | • In patients classified by Modified Duke Criteria as having “possible IE,” FDG-PET/CT is reasonable as adjunct diagnostic imaging (class IIa, level of evidence B-NR) |
| MDCTA | • For the evaluation of PVE MDCTA may perform similarly or even superiorly to echocardiography when it comes to the detection of prosthesis associated dehiscence, vegetations, abscesses, and pseudoaneurysms. However, due to a lack of large comparative studies between the two echocardiography should always be performed first | • In patients in whom the anatomy cannot be clearly delineated by echocardiography in the setting of suspected paravalvular infections, CT imaging is reasonable (class IIa, level of evidence B-NR) |
| CMRI | • Myocarditis and myocardial involvement may be best assessed using CMRI and TTE | • No specific recommendation |
Recommendations are quoted from the respective guidelines or summarized as appropriate. CMRI, cardiac magnetic resonance imaging; FDG-PET, .
Figure 1Overview of Diagnosis of PVE. FDG-PET, 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography; IE, infective endocarditis; MDC, modified duke criteria; MDCTA, multidetector computed tomographic angiography; NVE, native valve endocarditis; PVE, prosthetic valve endocarditis; TEE, transesophageal echocardiogram; TTE, transthoracic echocardiogram.