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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |