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