CMR Predictors of Favorable Outcome in Myocarditis : A Single-Center Experience
Background: Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) has emerged as the most accurate, non-invasive method to support the diagnosis of clinically suspected myocarditis and as a risk-stratification tool in patients with cardiomyopathies. We aim to assess the diagnostic and prognostic role of CMR at diagnosis in patients with myocarditis. Methods: We enrolled consecutive single-center patients with 2013 ESC consensus-based endomyocardial biopsy (EMB)-proven or clinically suspected myocarditis undergoing CMR at diagnosis. The pre-specified outcome was defined as NYHA class > I and echocardiographic left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) < 50% at follow-up. Results: We included 207 patients (74% male, median age 36 years; 25% EMB-proven). CMR showed the highest sensitivity in myocarditis with infarct-like presentation. Patients with EMB-proven myocarditis were more likely to have diffuse LGE and right ventricular LGE (p < 0.001), which was also more common among patients with arrhythmic presentation (p = 0.001). The outcome was met in 17 patients at any follow-up time point, more commonly in those with larger biventricular volumes (p < 0.001), CMR-based diagnosis of dilated cardiomyopathy (p < 0.001), and ischemic LGE (p = 0.005). Higher biventricular systolic function (p < 0.001) and greater LGE extent (p = 0.033) at diagnosis had a protective effect. Conclusions: In our single-center cohort of rigorously defined myocarditis patients, higher biventricular systolic function and greater LGE extent on CMR at diagnosis identified patients with better functional class and higher left ventricular ejection fraction at follow-up. Conversely, larger biventricular volumes, CMR-based DCM features, and the presence of an ischemic LGE pattern at diagnosis were predictors of worse functional class and LV systolic dysfunction at follow-up. Larger prospective studies are warranted to extend our findings to multi-center cohorts.
| Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
|---|
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2024 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2024 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:13 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
Journal of clinical medicine - 13(2024), 5 vom: 21. Feb. |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Baritussio, Anna [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
|---|
| Themen: |
Cardiovascular magnetic resonance |
|---|
| Anmerkungen: |
Date Revised 11.04.2024 published: Electronic Citation Status PubMed-not-MEDLINE |
|---|
| doi: |
10.3390/jcm13051229 |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
NLM370814274 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLM370814274 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20240411232727.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 240409s2024 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.3390/jcm13051229 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a pubmed24n1372.xml |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLM370814274 | ||
| 035 | |a (NLM)38592081 | ||
| 035 | |a (PII)1229 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Baritussio, Anna |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a CMR Predictors of Favorable Outcome in Myocarditis |b A Single-Center Experience |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2024 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ƒaComputermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a ƒa Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a Date Revised 11.04.2024 | ||
| 500 | |a published: Electronic | ||
| 500 | |a Citation Status PubMed-not-MEDLINE | ||
| 520 | |a Background: Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) has emerged as the most accurate, non-invasive method to support the diagnosis of clinically suspected myocarditis and as a risk-stratification tool in patients with cardiomyopathies. We aim to assess the diagnostic and prognostic role of CMR at diagnosis in patients with myocarditis. Methods: We enrolled consecutive single-center patients with 2013 ESC consensus-based endomyocardial biopsy (EMB)-proven or clinically suspected myocarditis undergoing CMR at diagnosis. The pre-specified outcome was defined as NYHA class > I and echocardiographic left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) < 50% at follow-up. Results: We included 207 patients (74% male, median age 36 years; 25% EMB-proven). CMR showed the highest sensitivity in myocarditis with infarct-like presentation. Patients with EMB-proven myocarditis were more likely to have diffuse LGE and right ventricular LGE (p < 0.001), which was also more common among patients with arrhythmic presentation (p = 0.001). The outcome was met in 17 patients at any follow-up time point, more commonly in those with larger biventricular volumes (p < 0.001), CMR-based diagnosis of dilated cardiomyopathy (p < 0.001), and ischemic LGE (p = 0.005). Higher biventricular systolic function (p < 0.001) and greater LGE extent (p = 0.033) at diagnosis had a protective effect. Conclusions: In our single-center cohort of rigorously defined myocarditis patients, higher biventricular systolic function and greater LGE extent on CMR at diagnosis identified patients with better functional class and higher left ventricular ejection fraction at follow-up. Conversely, larger biventricular volumes, CMR-based DCM features, and the presence of an ischemic LGE pattern at diagnosis were predictors of worse functional class and LV systolic dysfunction at follow-up. Larger prospective studies are warranted to extend our findings to multi-center cohorts | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Journal Article | |
| 650 | 4 | |a cardiovascular magnetic resonance | |
| 650 | 4 | |a endomyocardial biopsy | |
| 650 | 4 | |a myocarditis | |
| 650 | 4 | |a outcome | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Cheng, Chun-Yan |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Simeti, Giuseppe |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Ocagli, Honoria |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Lorenzoni, Giulia |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Giordani, Andrea Silvio |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Basso, Cristina |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Rizzo, Stefania |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a De Gaspari, Monica |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Motta, Raffaella |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a De Conti, Giorgio |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Perazzolo Marra, Martina |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Tarantini, Giuseppe |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Iliceto, Sabino |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Gregori, Dario |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Marcolongo, Renzo |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Caforio, Alida Linda Patrizia |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Journal of clinical medicine |d 2012 |g 13(2024), 5 vom: 21. Feb. |w (DE-627)NLM230666310 |x 2077-0383 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:13 |g year:2024 |g number:5 |g day:21 |g month:02 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm13051229 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NLM | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 13 |j 2024 |e 5 |b 21 |c 02 | ||