Advertisement

Assessment of myocardial delayed enhancement with cardiac computed tomography in cardiomyopathies: a prospective comparison with delayed enhancement cardiac magnetic resonance imaging

  • Hye-Jeong Lee
  • Dong Jin Im
  • Jong-Chan Youn
  • Suyon Chang
  • Young Joo Suh
  • Yoo Jin Hong
  • Young Jin Kim
  • Jin Hur
  • Byoung Wook ChoiEmail author
Original Paper

Abstract

To evaluate the feasibility of cardiac CT for the evaluation of myocardial delayed enhancement (MDE) in the assessment of patients with cardiomyopathy, compared to cardiac MRI. A total of 37 patients (mean age 54.9 ± 15.7 years, 24 men) who underwent cardiac MRI to evaluate cardiomyopathy were enrolled. Dual-energy ECG-gated cardiac CT was acquired 12 min after contrast injection. Two observers evaluated cardiac MRI and cardiac CT at different kV settings (100, 120 and 140 kV) independently for MDE pattern-classification (patchy, transmural, subendocardial, epicardial and mesocardial), differentiation between ischemic and non-ischemic cardiomyopathy and MDE quantification (percentage MDE). Kappa statics and the intraclass correlation coefficient were used for statistical analysis. Among different kV settings, 100-kV CT showed excellent agreements compared to cardiac MRI for MDE detection (κ = 0.886 and 0.873, respectively), MDE pattern-classification (κ = 0.888 and 0.881, respectively) and differentiation between ischemic and non-ischemic cardiomyopathy (κ = 1.000 and 0.893, respectively) for both Observer 1 and Observer 2. The Bland–Altman plot between MRI and 100-kV CT for the percentage MDE showed a very small bias (−0.15%) with 95% limits of agreement of −7.02 and 6.72. Cardiac CT using 100 kV might be an alternative method to cardiac MRI in the assessment of cardiomyopathy, particularly in patients with contraindications to cardiac MRI.

Keywords

Cardiomyopathy Myocardial delayed enhancement Myocardial fibrosis Cardiac computed tomography Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by a grant of LG life science (4-2010-0210).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Research involving human participants

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national reaserch committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

References

  1. 1.
    Felker GM, Thompson RE, Hare JM et al (2000) Underlying causes and long-term survival in patients with initially unexplained cardiomyopathy. N Engl J Med 342(15):1077–1084CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mahrholdt H, Wagner A, Judd RM, Sechtem U, Kim RJ (2005) Delayed enhancement cardiovascular magnetic resonance assessment of non-ischaemic cardiomyopathies. Eur Heart J 26(15):1461–1474CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cummings KW, Bhalla S, Javidan-Nejad C, Bierhals AJ, Gutierrez FR, Woodard PK (2009) A pattern-based approach to assessment of delayed enhancement in nonischemic cardiomyopathy at MR imaging. Radiographics 29(1):89–103CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wu E, Judd RM, Vargas JD, Klocke FJ, Bonow RO, Kim RJ (2001) Visualisation of presence, location, and transmural extent of healed Q-wave and non-Q-wave myocardial infarction. Lancet 357(9249):21–28CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    McCrohon JA, Moon JC, Prasad SK et al (2003) Differentiation of heart failure related to dilated cardiomyopathy and coronary artery disease using gadolinium-enhanced cardiovascular magnetic resonance. Circulation 108(1):54–59CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Aljaroudi WA, Flamm SD, Saliba W, Wilkoff BL, Kwon D (2013) Role of CMR imaging in risk stratification for sudden cardiac death. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 6(3):392–406CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Allard M, Doucet D, Kien P, Bonnemain B, Caille JM (1988) Experimental study of A-gadolinium. Pharmacokinetics and pharmacologic properties. Invest Radiol 23(Suppl 1):S271–S274CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gerber BL, Belge B, Legros GJ et al (2006) Characterization of acute and chronic myocardial infarcts by multidetector computed tomography: comparison with contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance. Circulation 113(6):823–833CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gray WR, Buja LM, Hagler HK, Parkey RW, Willerson JT (1978) Computed tomography for localization and sizing of experimental acute myocardial infarcts. Circulation 58(3 Pt 1):497–504CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mahnken AH, Koos R, Katoh M et al (2005) Assessment of myocardial viability in reperfused acute myocardial infarction using 16-slice computed tomography in comparison to magnetic resonance imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol 45(12):2042–2047CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lardo AC, Cordeiro MA, Silva C et al (2006) Contrast-enhanced multidetector computed tomography viability imaging after myocardial infarction: characterization of myocyte death, microvascular obstruction, and chronic scar. Circulation 113(3):394–404CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Wichmann JL, Bauer RW, Doss M et al (2013) Diagnostic accuracy of late iodine-enhancement dual-energy computed tomography for the detection of chronic myocardial infarction compared with late gadolinium-enhancement 3-T magnetic resonance imaging. Invest Radiol 48(12):851–856CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wichmann JL, Arbaciauskaite R, Kerl JM et al (2014) Evaluation of monoenergetic late iodine enhancement dual-energy computed tomography for imaging of chronic myocardial infarction. Eur Radiol 24(6):1211–1218CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Shiozaki AA, Senra T, Arteaga E et al (2013) Myocardial fibrosis detected by cardiac CT predicts ventricular fibrillation/ventricular tachycardia events in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 7(3):173–181CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Zhao L, Ma X, Delano MC et al (2013) Assessment of myocardial fibrosis and coronary arteries in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy using combined arterial and delayed enhanced CT: comparison with MR and coronary angiography. Eur Radiol 23(4):1034–1043CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Langer C, Lutz M, Eden M et al (2014) Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy in cardiac CT: a validation study on the detection of intramyocardial fibrosis in consecutive patients. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 30(3):659–667CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Nakayama Y, Awai K, Funama Y et al (2005) Abdominal CT with low tube voltage: preliminary observations about radiation dose, contrast enhancement, image quality, and noise. Radiology 237(3):945–951CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Cerqueira MD, Weissman NJ, Dilsizian V et al (2002) Standardized myocardial segmentation and nomenclature for tomographic imaging of the heart. A statement for healthcare professionals from the Cardiac Imaging Committee of the Council on Clinical Cardiology of the American Heart Association. Circulation 105(4):539–542CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Richardson P, McKenna W, Bristow M et al (1996) Report of the 1995 World Health Organization/International Society and Federation of Cardiology Task Force on the Definition and Classification of cardiomyopathies. Circulation 93(5):841–842CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bluemke DA (2010) MRI of nonischemic cardiomyopathy. Am J Roentgenol 195(4):935–940CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bland JM, Altman DG (2007) Agreement between methods of measurement with multiple observations per individual. J Biopharm Stat 17(4):571–582CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Landis JR, Koch GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33(1):159–174CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Zhao L, Ma X, Feuchtner GM, Zhang C, Fan Z (2014) Quantification of myocardial delayed enhancement and wall thickness in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: multidetector computed tomography versus magnetic resonance imaging. Eur J Radiol 83(10):1778–1785CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mendoza DD, Weigold WG (2009) Evaluation of myocardial viability by multidetector CT. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 3(1 Suppl):S2–S12CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Mendoza DD, Joshi SB, Weissman G, Taylor AJ, Weigold WG (2010) Viability imaging by cardiac computed tomography. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 4(2):83–91CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Mahnken AH, Bruners P, Muhlenbruch G et al (2007) Low tube voltage improves computed tomography imaging of delayed myocardial contrast enhancement in an experimental acute myocardial infarction model. Invest Radiol 42(2):123–129CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Chang HJ, George RT, Schuleri KH et al (2009) Prospective electrocardiogram-gated delayed enhanced multidetector computed tomography accurately quantifies infarct size and reduces radiation exposure. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2(4):412–420CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hye-Jeong Lee
    • 1
  • Dong Jin Im
    • 1
  • Jong-Chan Youn
    • 2
  • Suyon Chang
    • 1
  • Young Joo Suh
    • 1
  • Yoo Jin Hong
    • 1
  • Young Jin Kim
    • 1
  • Jin Hur
    • 1
  • Byoung Wook Choi
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Radiology, Research Institute of Radiological Science, Severance HospitalYonsei University College of MedicineSeoulSouth Korea
  2. 2.Division of Cardiology, Cardiovascular Hospital, Severance HospitalYonsei University College of MedicineSeoulSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations