Cargando…

Diagnostic value of cardiovascular magnetic resonance in comparison to endomyocardial biopsy in cardiac amyloidosis: a multi-centre study

BACKGROUND: Cardiac amyloidosis (CA) is an infiltrative disease characterised by accumulation of amyloid deposits in the extracellular space of the myocardium—comprising transthyretin (ATTR) and light chain (AL) amyloidosis as the most frequent subtypes. Histopathological proof of amyloid deposits b...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chatzantonis, Grigorios, Bietenbeck, Michael, Elsanhoury, Ahmed, Tschöpe, Carsten, Pieske, Burkert, Tauscher, Gloria, Vietheer, Julia, Shomanova, Zornitsa, Mahrholdt, Heiko, Rolf, Andreas, Kelle, Sebastian, Yilmaz, Ali
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8055632/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33170349
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00392-020-01771-1
_version_ 1783680489900474368
author Chatzantonis, Grigorios
Bietenbeck, Michael
Elsanhoury, Ahmed
Tschöpe, Carsten
Pieske, Burkert
Tauscher, Gloria
Vietheer, Julia
Shomanova, Zornitsa
Mahrholdt, Heiko
Rolf, Andreas
Kelle, Sebastian
Yilmaz, Ali
author_facet Chatzantonis, Grigorios
Bietenbeck, Michael
Elsanhoury, Ahmed
Tschöpe, Carsten
Pieske, Burkert
Tauscher, Gloria
Vietheer, Julia
Shomanova, Zornitsa
Mahrholdt, Heiko
Rolf, Andreas
Kelle, Sebastian
Yilmaz, Ali
author_sort Chatzantonis, Grigorios
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Cardiac amyloidosis (CA) is an infiltrative disease characterised by accumulation of amyloid deposits in the extracellular space of the myocardium—comprising transthyretin (ATTR) and light chain (AL) amyloidosis as the most frequent subtypes. Histopathological proof of amyloid deposits by endomyocardial biopsy (EMB) is the gold standard for diagnosis of CA. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) allows non-invasive workup of suspected CA. We conducted a multi-centre study to assess the diagnostic value of CMR in comparison to EMB for the diagnosis of CA. METHODS: We studied N = 160 patients characterised by symptoms of heart failure and presence of left ventricular (LV) hypertrophy of unknown origin who presented to specialised cardiomyopathy centres in Germany and underwent further diagnostic workup by both CMR and EMB. If CA was diagnosed, additional subtyping based on EMB specimens and monoclonal protein studies in serum was performed. The CMR protocol comprised cine- and late-gadolinium-enhancement (LGE)-imaging as well as native and post-contrast T1-mapping (in a subgroup)—allowing to measure extracellular volume fraction (ECV) of the myocardium. RESULTS: An EMB-based diagnosis of CA was made in N = 120 patients (CA group) whereas N = 40 patients demonstrated other diagnoses (CONTROL group). In the CA group, N = 114 (95%) patients showed a characteristic pattern of LGE indicative of CA. In the CONTROL group, only 1/40 (2%) patient showed a “false-positive” LGE pattern suggestive of CA. In the CA group, there was no patient with elevated T1-/ECV-values without a characteristic pattern of LGE indicative of CA. LGE-CMR showed a sensitivity of 95% and a specificity of 98% for the diagnosis of CA. The combination of a characteristic LGE pattern indicating CA with unremarkable monoclonal protein studies resulted in the diagnosis of ATTR-CA (confirmed by EMB) with a specificity of 98% [95%-confidence interval (CI) 92–100%] and a positive predictive value (PPV) of 99% (95%-CI 92–100%), respectively. The EMB-associated risk of complications was 3.13% in this study—without any detrimental or persistent complications. CONCLUSION: Non-invasive CMR shows an excellent diagnostic accuracy and yield regarding CA. When combined with monoclonal protein studies, CMR can differentiate ATTR from AL with high accuracy and predictive value. However, invasive EMB remains a safe invasive gold-standard and allows to differentiate CA from other cardiomyopathies that can also cause LV hypertrophy. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s00392-020-01771-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8055632
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-80556322021-05-05 Diagnostic value of cardiovascular magnetic resonance in comparison to endomyocardial biopsy in cardiac amyloidosis: a multi-centre study Chatzantonis, Grigorios Bietenbeck, Michael Elsanhoury, Ahmed Tschöpe, Carsten Pieske, Burkert Tauscher, Gloria Vietheer, Julia Shomanova, Zornitsa Mahrholdt, Heiko Rolf, Andreas Kelle, Sebastian Yilmaz, Ali Clin Res Cardiol Original Paper BACKGROUND: Cardiac amyloidosis (CA) is an infiltrative disease characterised by accumulation of amyloid deposits in the extracellular space of the myocardium—comprising transthyretin (ATTR) and light chain (AL) amyloidosis as the most frequent subtypes. Histopathological proof of amyloid deposits by endomyocardial biopsy (EMB) is the gold standard for diagnosis of CA. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) allows non-invasive workup of suspected CA. We conducted a multi-centre study to assess the diagnostic value of CMR in comparison to EMB for the diagnosis of CA. METHODS: We studied N = 160 patients characterised by symptoms of heart failure and presence of left ventricular (LV) hypertrophy of unknown origin who presented to specialised cardiomyopathy centres in Germany and underwent further diagnostic workup by both CMR and EMB. If CA was diagnosed, additional subtyping based on EMB specimens and monoclonal protein studies in serum was performed. The CMR protocol comprised cine- and late-gadolinium-enhancement (LGE)-imaging as well as native and post-contrast T1-mapping (in a subgroup)—allowing to measure extracellular volume fraction (ECV) of the myocardium. RESULTS: An EMB-based diagnosis of CA was made in N = 120 patients (CA group) whereas N = 40 patients demonstrated other diagnoses (CONTROL group). In the CA group, N = 114 (95%) patients showed a characteristic pattern of LGE indicative of CA. In the CONTROL group, only 1/40 (2%) patient showed a “false-positive” LGE pattern suggestive of CA. In the CA group, there was no patient with elevated T1-/ECV-values without a characteristic pattern of LGE indicative of CA. LGE-CMR showed a sensitivity of 95% and a specificity of 98% for the diagnosis of CA. The combination of a characteristic LGE pattern indicating CA with unremarkable monoclonal protein studies resulted in the diagnosis of ATTR-CA (confirmed by EMB) with a specificity of 98% [95%-confidence interval (CI) 92–100%] and a positive predictive value (PPV) of 99% (95%-CI 92–100%), respectively. The EMB-associated risk of complications was 3.13% in this study—without any detrimental or persistent complications. CONCLUSION: Non-invasive CMR shows an excellent diagnostic accuracy and yield regarding CA. When combined with monoclonal protein studies, CMR can differentiate ATTR from AL with high accuracy and predictive value. However, invasive EMB remains a safe invasive gold-standard and allows to differentiate CA from other cardiomyopathies that can also cause LV hypertrophy. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s00392-020-01771-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2020-11-10 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC8055632/ /pubmed/33170349 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00392-020-01771-1 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Paper
Chatzantonis, Grigorios
Bietenbeck, Michael
Elsanhoury, Ahmed
Tschöpe, Carsten
Pieske, Burkert
Tauscher, Gloria
Vietheer, Julia
Shomanova, Zornitsa
Mahrholdt, Heiko
Rolf, Andreas
Kelle, Sebastian
Yilmaz, Ali
Diagnostic value of cardiovascular magnetic resonance in comparison to endomyocardial biopsy in cardiac amyloidosis: a multi-centre study
title Diagnostic value of cardiovascular magnetic resonance in comparison to endomyocardial biopsy in cardiac amyloidosis: a multi-centre study
title_full Diagnostic value of cardiovascular magnetic resonance in comparison to endomyocardial biopsy in cardiac amyloidosis: a multi-centre study
title_fullStr Diagnostic value of cardiovascular magnetic resonance in comparison to endomyocardial biopsy in cardiac amyloidosis: a multi-centre study
title_full_unstemmed Diagnostic value of cardiovascular magnetic resonance in comparison to endomyocardial biopsy in cardiac amyloidosis: a multi-centre study
title_short Diagnostic value of cardiovascular magnetic resonance in comparison to endomyocardial biopsy in cardiac amyloidosis: a multi-centre study
title_sort diagnostic value of cardiovascular magnetic resonance in comparison to endomyocardial biopsy in cardiac amyloidosis: a multi-centre study
topic Original Paper
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8055632/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33170349
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00392-020-01771-1
work_keys_str_mv AT chatzantonisgrigorios diagnosticvalueofcardiovascularmagneticresonanceincomparisontoendomyocardialbiopsyincardiacamyloidosisamulticentrestudy
AT bietenbeckmichael diagnosticvalueofcardiovascularmagneticresonanceincomparisontoendomyocardialbiopsyincardiacamyloidosisamulticentrestudy
AT elsanhouryahmed diagnosticvalueofcardiovascularmagneticresonanceincomparisontoendomyocardialbiopsyincardiacamyloidosisamulticentrestudy
AT tschopecarsten diagnosticvalueofcardiovascularmagneticresonanceincomparisontoendomyocardialbiopsyincardiacamyloidosisamulticentrestudy
AT pieskeburkert diagnosticvalueofcardiovascularmagneticresonanceincomparisontoendomyocardialbiopsyincardiacamyloidosisamulticentrestudy
AT tauschergloria diagnosticvalueofcardiovascularmagneticresonanceincomparisontoendomyocardialbiopsyincardiacamyloidosisamulticentrestudy
AT vietheerjulia diagnosticvalueofcardiovascularmagneticresonanceincomparisontoendomyocardialbiopsyincardiacamyloidosisamulticentrestudy
AT shomanovazornitsa diagnosticvalueofcardiovascularmagneticresonanceincomparisontoendomyocardialbiopsyincardiacamyloidosisamulticentrestudy
AT mahrholdtheiko diagnosticvalueofcardiovascularmagneticresonanceincomparisontoendomyocardialbiopsyincardiacamyloidosisamulticentrestudy
AT rolfandreas diagnosticvalueofcardiovascularmagneticresonanceincomparisontoendomyocardialbiopsyincardiacamyloidosisamulticentrestudy
AT kellesebastian diagnosticvalueofcardiovascularmagneticresonanceincomparisontoendomyocardialbiopsyincardiacamyloidosisamulticentrestudy
AT yilmazali diagnosticvalueofcardiovascularmagneticresonanceincomparisontoendomyocardialbiopsyincardiacamyloidosisamulticentrestudy