Cargando…

Accuracy of left ventricular ejection fraction by contemporary multiple gated acquisition scanning in patients with cancer: comparison with cardiovascular magnetic resonance

BACKGROUND: Multiple gated acquisition scanning (MUGA) is a common imaging modality for baseline and serial assessment of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) for cardiotoxicity risk assessment prior to, surveillance during, and surveillance after administration of potentially cardiotoxic cance...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Huang, Hans, Nijjar, Prabhjot S., Misialek, Jeffrey R., Blaes, Anne, Derrico, Nicholas P., Kazmirczak, Felipe, Klem, Igor, Farzaneh-Far, Afshin, Shenoy, Chetan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5364623/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28335788
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12968-017-0348-4
_version_ 1782517359852912640
author Huang, Hans
Nijjar, Prabhjot S.
Misialek, Jeffrey R.
Blaes, Anne
Derrico, Nicholas P.
Kazmirczak, Felipe
Klem, Igor
Farzaneh-Far, Afshin
Shenoy, Chetan
author_facet Huang, Hans
Nijjar, Prabhjot S.
Misialek, Jeffrey R.
Blaes, Anne
Derrico, Nicholas P.
Kazmirczak, Felipe
Klem, Igor
Farzaneh-Far, Afshin
Shenoy, Chetan
author_sort Huang, Hans
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Multiple gated acquisition scanning (MUGA) is a common imaging modality for baseline and serial assessment of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) for cardiotoxicity risk assessment prior to, surveillance during, and surveillance after administration of potentially cardiotoxic cancer treatment. The objective of this study was to compare the accuracy of left ventricular ejection fractions (LVEF) obtained by contemporary clinical multiple gated acquisition scans (MUGA) with reference LVEFs from cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) in consecutive patients with cancer. METHODS: In a cross-sectional study, we compared MUGA clinical and CMR reference LVEFs in 75 patients with cancer who had both studies within 30 days. Misclassification was assessed using the two most common thresholds of LVEF used in cardiotoxicity clinical studies and practice: 50 and 55%. RESULTS: Compared to CMR reference LVEFs, MUGA clinical LVEFs were only lower by a mean of 1.5% (48.5% vs. 50.0%, p = 0.17). However, the limits of agreement between MUGA clinical and CMR reference LVEFs were wide at −19.4 to 16.5%. At LVEF thresholds of 50 and 55%, there was misclassification of 35 and 20% of cancer patients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: MUGA clinical LVEFs are only modestly accurate when compared with CMR reference LVEFs. These data have significant implications on clinical research and patient care of a population with, or at risk for, cardiotoxicity.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5364623
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-53646232017-03-24 Accuracy of left ventricular ejection fraction by contemporary multiple gated acquisition scanning in patients with cancer: comparison with cardiovascular magnetic resonance Huang, Hans Nijjar, Prabhjot S. Misialek, Jeffrey R. Blaes, Anne Derrico, Nicholas P. Kazmirczak, Felipe Klem, Igor Farzaneh-Far, Afshin Shenoy, Chetan J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Research BACKGROUND: Multiple gated acquisition scanning (MUGA) is a common imaging modality for baseline and serial assessment of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) for cardiotoxicity risk assessment prior to, surveillance during, and surveillance after administration of potentially cardiotoxic cancer treatment. The objective of this study was to compare the accuracy of left ventricular ejection fractions (LVEF) obtained by contemporary clinical multiple gated acquisition scans (MUGA) with reference LVEFs from cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) in consecutive patients with cancer. METHODS: In a cross-sectional study, we compared MUGA clinical and CMR reference LVEFs in 75 patients with cancer who had both studies within 30 days. Misclassification was assessed using the two most common thresholds of LVEF used in cardiotoxicity clinical studies and practice: 50 and 55%. RESULTS: Compared to CMR reference LVEFs, MUGA clinical LVEFs were only lower by a mean of 1.5% (48.5% vs. 50.0%, p = 0.17). However, the limits of agreement between MUGA clinical and CMR reference LVEFs were wide at −19.4 to 16.5%. At LVEF thresholds of 50 and 55%, there was misclassification of 35 and 20% of cancer patients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: MUGA clinical LVEFs are only modestly accurate when compared with CMR reference LVEFs. These data have significant implications on clinical research and patient care of a population with, or at risk for, cardiotoxicity. BioMed Central 2017-03-24 /pmc/articles/PMC5364623/ /pubmed/28335788 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12968-017-0348-4 Text en © The Author(s). 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Huang, Hans
Nijjar, Prabhjot S.
Misialek, Jeffrey R.
Blaes, Anne
Derrico, Nicholas P.
Kazmirczak, Felipe
Klem, Igor
Farzaneh-Far, Afshin
Shenoy, Chetan
Accuracy of left ventricular ejection fraction by contemporary multiple gated acquisition scanning in patients with cancer: comparison with cardiovascular magnetic resonance
title Accuracy of left ventricular ejection fraction by contemporary multiple gated acquisition scanning in patients with cancer: comparison with cardiovascular magnetic resonance
title_full Accuracy of left ventricular ejection fraction by contemporary multiple gated acquisition scanning in patients with cancer: comparison with cardiovascular magnetic resonance
title_fullStr Accuracy of left ventricular ejection fraction by contemporary multiple gated acquisition scanning in patients with cancer: comparison with cardiovascular magnetic resonance
title_full_unstemmed Accuracy of left ventricular ejection fraction by contemporary multiple gated acquisition scanning in patients with cancer: comparison with cardiovascular magnetic resonance
title_short Accuracy of left ventricular ejection fraction by contemporary multiple gated acquisition scanning in patients with cancer: comparison with cardiovascular magnetic resonance
title_sort accuracy of left ventricular ejection fraction by contemporary multiple gated acquisition scanning in patients with cancer: comparison with cardiovascular magnetic resonance
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5364623/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28335788
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12968-017-0348-4
work_keys_str_mv AT huanghans accuracyofleftventricularejectionfractionbycontemporarymultiplegatedacquisitionscanninginpatientswithcancercomparisonwithcardiovascularmagneticresonance
AT nijjarprabhjots accuracyofleftventricularejectionfractionbycontemporarymultiplegatedacquisitionscanninginpatientswithcancercomparisonwithcardiovascularmagneticresonance
AT misialekjeffreyr accuracyofleftventricularejectionfractionbycontemporarymultiplegatedacquisitionscanninginpatientswithcancercomparisonwithcardiovascularmagneticresonance
AT blaesanne accuracyofleftventricularejectionfractionbycontemporarymultiplegatedacquisitionscanninginpatientswithcancercomparisonwithcardiovascularmagneticresonance
AT derriconicholasp accuracyofleftventricularejectionfractionbycontemporarymultiplegatedacquisitionscanninginpatientswithcancercomparisonwithcardiovascularmagneticresonance
AT kazmirczakfelipe accuracyofleftventricularejectionfractionbycontemporarymultiplegatedacquisitionscanninginpatientswithcancercomparisonwithcardiovascularmagneticresonance
AT klemigor accuracyofleftventricularejectionfractionbycontemporarymultiplegatedacquisitionscanninginpatientswithcancercomparisonwithcardiovascularmagneticresonance
AT farzanehfarafshin accuracyofleftventricularejectionfractionbycontemporarymultiplegatedacquisitionscanninginpatientswithcancercomparisonwithcardiovascularmagneticresonance
AT shenoychetan accuracyofleftventricularejectionfractionbycontemporarymultiplegatedacquisitionscanninginpatientswithcancercomparisonwithcardiovascularmagneticresonance