Cargando…

Assessment of sub-clinical acute cellular rejection after heart transplantation: comparison of cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and endomyocardial biopsy

OBJECTIVE: Comparing the diagnostic value of multi-sequential cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) with endomyocardial biopsy (EMB) for sub-clinical cardiac allograft rejection. METHODS: One hundred and forty-six examinations in 73 patients (mean age 53 ± 12 years, 58 men) were performed using a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Krieghoff, Christian, Barten, Markus J., Hildebrand, Lysann, Grothoff, Matthias, Lehmkuhl, Lukas, Lücke, Christian, Andres, Claudia, Nitzsche, Stefan, Riese, Franziska, Strüber, Martin, Mohr, Friedrich Wilhelm, Gutberlet, Matthias
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4155184/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24895035
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-014-3246-2
_version_ 1782333556689731584
author Krieghoff, Christian
Barten, Markus J.
Hildebrand, Lysann
Grothoff, Matthias
Lehmkuhl, Lukas
Lücke, Christian
Andres, Claudia
Nitzsche, Stefan
Riese, Franziska
Strüber, Martin
Mohr, Friedrich Wilhelm
Gutberlet, Matthias
author_facet Krieghoff, Christian
Barten, Markus J.
Hildebrand, Lysann
Grothoff, Matthias
Lehmkuhl, Lukas
Lücke, Christian
Andres, Claudia
Nitzsche, Stefan
Riese, Franziska
Strüber, Martin
Mohr, Friedrich Wilhelm
Gutberlet, Matthias
author_sort Krieghoff, Christian
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: Comparing the diagnostic value of multi-sequential cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) with endomyocardial biopsy (EMB) for sub-clinical cardiac allograft rejection. METHODS: One hundred and forty-six examinations in 73 patients (mean age 53 ± 12 years, 58 men) were performed using a 1.5 Tesla system and compared to EMB. Examinations included a STIR (short tau inversion recovery) sequence for calculation of edema ratio (ER), a T1-weighted spin-echo sequence for assessment of global relative enhancement (gRE), and inversion-recovery sequences to visualize late gadolinium enhancement (LGE). Histological grade ≥1B was considered relevant rejection. RESULTS: One hundred and twenty-seven (127/146 = 87 %) EMBs demonstrated no or mild signs of rejection (grades ≤1A) and 19/146 (13 %) a relevant rejection (grade ≥1B). Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive, and negative predictive values were as follows: ER: 63 %, 78 %, 30 %, and 93 %; gRE: 63 %, 70 %, 24 %, and 93 %; LGE: 68 %, 36 %, 13 %, and 87 %; with the combination of ER and gRE with at least one out of two positive: 84 %, 57 %, 23 %, and 96 %. ROC analysis revealed an area under the curve of 0.724 for ER and 0.659 for gRE. CONCLUSION: CMR parameters for myocarditis are useful to detect sub-clinical acute cellular rejection after heart transplantation. Comparable results to myocarditis can be achieved with a combination of parameters. KEY POINTS: • Magnetic resonance imaging is useful for the assessment of cardiac allograft rejection. • CMR has a high negative predictive value for exclusion of allograft rejection. • Diagnostic performance is not yet good enough to replace endomyocardial biopsy.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4155184
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-41551842014-09-08 Assessment of sub-clinical acute cellular rejection after heart transplantation: comparison of cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and endomyocardial biopsy Krieghoff, Christian Barten, Markus J. Hildebrand, Lysann Grothoff, Matthias Lehmkuhl, Lukas Lücke, Christian Andres, Claudia Nitzsche, Stefan Riese, Franziska Strüber, Martin Mohr, Friedrich Wilhelm Gutberlet, Matthias Eur Radiol Cardiac OBJECTIVE: Comparing the diagnostic value of multi-sequential cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) with endomyocardial biopsy (EMB) for sub-clinical cardiac allograft rejection. METHODS: One hundred and forty-six examinations in 73 patients (mean age 53 ± 12 years, 58 men) were performed using a 1.5 Tesla system and compared to EMB. Examinations included a STIR (short tau inversion recovery) sequence for calculation of edema ratio (ER), a T1-weighted spin-echo sequence for assessment of global relative enhancement (gRE), and inversion-recovery sequences to visualize late gadolinium enhancement (LGE). Histological grade ≥1B was considered relevant rejection. RESULTS: One hundred and twenty-seven (127/146 = 87 %) EMBs demonstrated no or mild signs of rejection (grades ≤1A) and 19/146 (13 %) a relevant rejection (grade ≥1B). Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive, and negative predictive values were as follows: ER: 63 %, 78 %, 30 %, and 93 %; gRE: 63 %, 70 %, 24 %, and 93 %; LGE: 68 %, 36 %, 13 %, and 87 %; with the combination of ER and gRE with at least one out of two positive: 84 %, 57 %, 23 %, and 96 %. ROC analysis revealed an area under the curve of 0.724 for ER and 0.659 for gRE. CONCLUSION: CMR parameters for myocarditis are useful to detect sub-clinical acute cellular rejection after heart transplantation. Comparable results to myocarditis can be achieved with a combination of parameters. KEY POINTS: • Magnetic resonance imaging is useful for the assessment of cardiac allograft rejection. • CMR has a high negative predictive value for exclusion of allograft rejection. • Diagnostic performance is not yet good enough to replace endomyocardial biopsy. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2014-06-04 2014 /pmc/articles/PMC4155184/ /pubmed/24895035 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-014-3246-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2014 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and the source are credited.
spellingShingle Cardiac
Krieghoff, Christian
Barten, Markus J.
Hildebrand, Lysann
Grothoff, Matthias
Lehmkuhl, Lukas
Lücke, Christian
Andres, Claudia
Nitzsche, Stefan
Riese, Franziska
Strüber, Martin
Mohr, Friedrich Wilhelm
Gutberlet, Matthias
Assessment of sub-clinical acute cellular rejection after heart transplantation: comparison of cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and endomyocardial biopsy
title Assessment of sub-clinical acute cellular rejection after heart transplantation: comparison of cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and endomyocardial biopsy
title_full Assessment of sub-clinical acute cellular rejection after heart transplantation: comparison of cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and endomyocardial biopsy
title_fullStr Assessment of sub-clinical acute cellular rejection after heart transplantation: comparison of cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and endomyocardial biopsy
title_full_unstemmed Assessment of sub-clinical acute cellular rejection after heart transplantation: comparison of cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and endomyocardial biopsy
title_short Assessment of sub-clinical acute cellular rejection after heart transplantation: comparison of cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and endomyocardial biopsy
title_sort assessment of sub-clinical acute cellular rejection after heart transplantation: comparison of cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and endomyocardial biopsy
topic Cardiac
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4155184/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24895035
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-014-3246-2
work_keys_str_mv AT krieghoffchristian assessmentofsubclinicalacutecellularrejectionafterhearttransplantationcomparisonofcardiacmagneticresonanceimagingandendomyocardialbiopsy
AT bartenmarkusj assessmentofsubclinicalacutecellularrejectionafterhearttransplantationcomparisonofcardiacmagneticresonanceimagingandendomyocardialbiopsy
AT hildebrandlysann assessmentofsubclinicalacutecellularrejectionafterhearttransplantationcomparisonofcardiacmagneticresonanceimagingandendomyocardialbiopsy
AT grothoffmatthias assessmentofsubclinicalacutecellularrejectionafterhearttransplantationcomparisonofcardiacmagneticresonanceimagingandendomyocardialbiopsy
AT lehmkuhllukas assessmentofsubclinicalacutecellularrejectionafterhearttransplantationcomparisonofcardiacmagneticresonanceimagingandendomyocardialbiopsy
AT luckechristian assessmentofsubclinicalacutecellularrejectionafterhearttransplantationcomparisonofcardiacmagneticresonanceimagingandendomyocardialbiopsy
AT andresclaudia assessmentofsubclinicalacutecellularrejectionafterhearttransplantationcomparisonofcardiacmagneticresonanceimagingandendomyocardialbiopsy
AT nitzschestefan assessmentofsubclinicalacutecellularrejectionafterhearttransplantationcomparisonofcardiacmagneticresonanceimagingandendomyocardialbiopsy
AT riesefranziska assessmentofsubclinicalacutecellularrejectionafterhearttransplantationcomparisonofcardiacmagneticresonanceimagingandendomyocardialbiopsy
AT strubermartin assessmentofsubclinicalacutecellularrejectionafterhearttransplantationcomparisonofcardiacmagneticresonanceimagingandendomyocardialbiopsy
AT mohrfriedrichwilhelm assessmentofsubclinicalacutecellularrejectionafterhearttransplantationcomparisonofcardiacmagneticresonanceimagingandendomyocardialbiopsy
AT gutberletmatthias assessmentofsubclinicalacutecellularrejectionafterhearttransplantationcomparisonofcardiacmagneticresonanceimagingandendomyocardialbiopsy