Comparison of morphologic assessment of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy by magnetic resonance versus echocardiographic imaging.

To compare the value of echocardiography and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the assessment of the amount and extent of hypertrophy in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HC) and, second, to correlate the degree of hypertrophy, as assessed by MRI, with clinical and electrocardiographic parameters, 30 consecutive patients (16 men and 14 women, aged 20 to 74 years) with HC were studied. Measurements of left ventricular wall thickness were performed at 11 predetermined segments (5 basal, 5 midventricular, and 1 apical) by 2-dimensional echocardiography and MRI. Two parameters derived from MRI studies were considered as indicators of the degree and extent of hypertrophy: (1) mean of the measured wall thickness at the 11 segments, and (2) the number of segments with thickness > 15 mm. Results showed that, from a total of 330 myocardial segments, thickness could be measured by echocardiography in 221 (67%), whereas MRI allowed measurement of 320 segments (97%). When compared with clinical and electrocardiographic data, no correlation was found regarding mean wall thickness and number of hypertrophied segments by MRI except for the presence of an abnormal electrocardiographic repolarization pattern. It is concluded that MRI allows a better assessment of the degree and extension of left ventricular hypertrophy than echocardiography in HC. Despite the precise information on hypertrophy provided by MRI, the amount and degree of hypertrophy bears no correlation with most of the clinical data in these patients.