Cargando…

Representation of cardiovascular magnetic resonance in the AHA / ACC guidelines

BACKGROUND: Whereas evidence supporting the diagnostic value of cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) has increased, there exists significant worldwide variability in the clinical utilization of CMR. A recent study demonstrated that CMR is represented in the majority of European Society for Cardio...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: von Knobelsdorff-Brenkenhoff, Florian, Pilz, Guenter, Schulz-Menger, Jeanette
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5611635/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28942735
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12968-017-0385-z
_version_ 1783265989301895168
author von Knobelsdorff-Brenkenhoff, Florian
Pilz, Guenter
Schulz-Menger, Jeanette
author_facet von Knobelsdorff-Brenkenhoff, Florian
Pilz, Guenter
Schulz-Menger, Jeanette
author_sort von Knobelsdorff-Brenkenhoff, Florian
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Whereas evidence supporting the diagnostic value of cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) has increased, there exists significant worldwide variability in the clinical utilization of CMR. A recent study demonstrated that CMR is represented in the majority of European Society for Cardiology (ESC) guidelines, with a large number of specific recommendations in particular regarding coronary artery disease. To further investigate the gap between the evidence and clinical use of CMR, this study analyzed the role of CMR in the guidelines of the American College of Cardiology (ACC) and American Heart Association (AHA). METHODS: Twenty-four AHA/ACC original guidelines, updates and new editions, published between 2006 and 2017, were screened for the terms “magnetic”, “MRI”, “CMR”, “MR” and “imaging”. Non-cardiovascular MR examinations were excluded. All CMR-related paragraphs and specific recommendations for CMR including the level of evidence (A, B, C) and the class of recommendation (I, IIa, IIb, III) were extracted. RESULTS: Twelve of the 24 guidelines (50.0%) contain specific recommendations regarding CMR. Four guidelines (16.7%) mention CMR in the text only, and 8 (33.3%) do not mention CMR. The 12 guidelines with recommendations for CMR contain in total 65 specific recommendations (31 class-I, 23 class-IIa, 6 class-IIb, 5 class-III). Most recommendations have evidence level C (44/65; 67.7%), followed by level B (21/65; 32.3%). There are no level A recommendations. 22/65 recommendations refer to vascular imaging, 17 to congenital heart disease, 8 to cardiomyopathies, 8 to myocardial stress testing, 5 to left and right ventricular function, 3 to viability, and 2 to valvular heart disease. CONCLUSIONS: CMR is represented in two thirds of the AHA/ACC guidelines, which contain a number of specific recommendations for the use of CMR. In a simplified comparison with the ESC guidelines, CMR is less represented in the AHA/ACC guidelines in particular in the field of coronary artery disease.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5611635
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-56116352017-10-11 Representation of cardiovascular magnetic resonance in the AHA / ACC guidelines von Knobelsdorff-Brenkenhoff, Florian Pilz, Guenter Schulz-Menger, Jeanette J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Research BACKGROUND: Whereas evidence supporting the diagnostic value of cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) has increased, there exists significant worldwide variability in the clinical utilization of CMR. A recent study demonstrated that CMR is represented in the majority of European Society for Cardiology (ESC) guidelines, with a large number of specific recommendations in particular regarding coronary artery disease. To further investigate the gap between the evidence and clinical use of CMR, this study analyzed the role of CMR in the guidelines of the American College of Cardiology (ACC) and American Heart Association (AHA). METHODS: Twenty-four AHA/ACC original guidelines, updates and new editions, published between 2006 and 2017, were screened for the terms “magnetic”, “MRI”, “CMR”, “MR” and “imaging”. Non-cardiovascular MR examinations were excluded. All CMR-related paragraphs and specific recommendations for CMR including the level of evidence (A, B, C) and the class of recommendation (I, IIa, IIb, III) were extracted. RESULTS: Twelve of the 24 guidelines (50.0%) contain specific recommendations regarding CMR. Four guidelines (16.7%) mention CMR in the text only, and 8 (33.3%) do not mention CMR. The 12 guidelines with recommendations for CMR contain in total 65 specific recommendations (31 class-I, 23 class-IIa, 6 class-IIb, 5 class-III). Most recommendations have evidence level C (44/65; 67.7%), followed by level B (21/65; 32.3%). There are no level A recommendations. 22/65 recommendations refer to vascular imaging, 17 to congenital heart disease, 8 to cardiomyopathies, 8 to myocardial stress testing, 5 to left and right ventricular function, 3 to viability, and 2 to valvular heart disease. CONCLUSIONS: CMR is represented in two thirds of the AHA/ACC guidelines, which contain a number of specific recommendations for the use of CMR. In a simplified comparison with the ESC guidelines, CMR is less represented in the AHA/ACC guidelines in particular in the field of coronary artery disease. BioMed Central 2017-09-25 /pmc/articles/PMC5611635/ /pubmed/28942735 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12968-017-0385-z 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
von Knobelsdorff-Brenkenhoff, Florian
Pilz, Guenter
Schulz-Menger, Jeanette
Representation of cardiovascular magnetic resonance in the AHA / ACC guidelines
title Representation of cardiovascular magnetic resonance in the AHA / ACC guidelines
title_full Representation of cardiovascular magnetic resonance in the AHA / ACC guidelines
title_fullStr Representation of cardiovascular magnetic resonance in the AHA / ACC guidelines
title_full_unstemmed Representation of cardiovascular magnetic resonance in the AHA / ACC guidelines
title_short Representation of cardiovascular magnetic resonance in the AHA / ACC guidelines
title_sort representation of cardiovascular magnetic resonance in the aha / acc guidelines
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5611635/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28942735
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12968-017-0385-z
work_keys_str_mv AT vonknobelsdorffbrenkenhoffflorian representationofcardiovascularmagneticresonanceintheahaaccguidelines
AT pilzguenter representationofcardiovascularmagneticresonanceintheahaaccguidelines
AT schulzmengerjeanette representationofcardiovascularmagneticresonanceintheahaaccguidelines