Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) and positron emission tomography (PET) imaging in the diagnosis and follow-up of patients with acute myocarditis and chronic inflammatory cardiomyopathy : A review paper with practical recommendations on behalf of the European Society of Cardiovascular Radiology (ESCR).

Advanced cardiac imaging techniques such as cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) and positron emission tomography (PET) are widely used in clinical practice in patients with acute myocarditis and chronic inflammatory cardiomyopathies (I-CMP). We aimed to provide a review article with practical recommendations from the European Society of Cardiovascular Radiology (ESCR), in order to guide physicians in the use and interpretation of CMR and PET in clinical practice both for acute myocarditis and follow-up in chronic forms of I-CMP.

Validation of time-resolved, automated peak trans-mitral velocity tracking: Two center four-dimensional flow cardiovascular magnetic resonance study.

OBJECTIVE: We aim to validate four-dimensional flow cardiovascular magnetic resonance (4D flow CMR) peak velocity tracking methods for measuring the peak velocity of mitral inflow against Doppler echocardiography. METHOD: Fifty patients were recruited who had 4D flow CMR and Doppler Echocardiography. After transvalvular flow segmentation using established valve tracking methods, peak velocity was automatically derived using three-dimensional streamlines of transvalvular flow. In addition, a static-planar method was used at the tip of mitral valve to mimic Doppler technique. RESULTS: Peak E-wave mitral inflow velocity was comparable between TTE and the novel 4D flow automated dynamic method (0.9 ± 0.5 vs 0.94 ± 0.6 m/s; p = 0.29) however there was a statistically significant difference when compared with the static planar method (0.85 ± 0.5 m/s; p = 0.01). Median A-wave peak velocity was also comparable across TTE and the automated dynamic streamline (0.77 ± 0.4 vs 0.76 ± 0.4 m/s; p = 0.77). A significant difference was seen with the static planar method (0.68 ± 0.5 m/s; p = 0.04). E/A ratio was comparable between TTE and both the automated dynamic and static planar method (1.1 ± 0.7 vs 1.15 ± 0.5 m/s; p = 0.74 and 1.15 ± 0.5 m/s; p = 0.5 respectively). Both novel 4D flow methods showed good correlation with TTE for E-wave (dynamic method; r = 0.70; P < 0.001 and static-planar method; r = 0.67; P < 0.001) and A-wave velocity measurements (dynamic method; r = 0.83; P < 0.001 and static method; r = 0.71; P < 0.001). The automated dynamic method demonstrated excellent intra/inter-observer reproducibility for all parameters. CONCLUSION: Automated dynamic peak velocity tracing method using 4D flow CMR is comparable to Doppler echocardiography for mitral inflow assessment and has excellent reproducibility for clinical use.

Myocardial inflammation and energetics by cardiac MRI: a review of emerging techniques.

The role of inflammation in cardiovascular pathophysiology has gained a lot of research interest in recent years. Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance has been a powerful tool in the non-invasive assessment of inflammation in several conditions. More recently, Ultrasmall superparamagnetic particles of iron oxide have been successfully used to evaluate macrophage activity and subsequently inflammation on a cellular level. Current evidence from research studies provides encouraging data and confirms that this evolving method can potentially have a huge impact on clinical practice as it can be used in the diagnosis and management of very common conditions such as coronary artery disease, ischaemic and non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy, myocarditis and atherosclerosis. Another important emerging concept is that of myocardial energetics. With the use of phosphorus magnetic resonance spectroscopy, myocardial energetic compromise has been proved to be an important feature in the pathophysiological process of several conditions including diabetic cardiomyopathy, inherited cardiomyopathies, valvular heart disease and cardiac transplant rejection. This unique tool is therefore being utilized to assess metabolic alterations in a wide range of cardiovascular diseases. This review systematically examines these state-of-the-art methods in detail and provides an insight into the mechanisms of action and the clinical implications of their use.

Machine learning automatically detects COVID-19 using chest CTs in a large multicenter cohort.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate machine learning classifiers and interpretable models using chest CT for detection of COVID-19 and differentiation from other pneumonias, interstitial lung disease (ILD) and normal CTs. METHODS: Our retrospective multi-institutional study obtained 2446 chest CTs from 16 institutions (including 1161 COVID-19 patients). Training/validation/testing cohorts included 1011/50/100 COVID-19, 388/16/33 ILD, 189/16/33 other pneumonias, and 559/17/34 normal (no pathologies) CTs. A metric-based approach for the classification of COVID-19 used interpretable features, relying on logistic regression and random forests. A deep learning-based classifier differentiated COVID-19 via 3D features extracted directly from CT attenuation and probability distribution of airspace opacities. RESULTS: Most discriminative features of COVID-19 are the percentage of airspace opacity and peripheral and basal predominant opacities, concordant with the typical characterization of COVID-19 in the literature. Unsupervised hierarchical clustering compares feature distribution across COVID-19 and control cohorts. The metrics-based classifier achieved AUC = 0.83, sensitivity = 0.74, and specificity = 0.79 versus respectively 0.93, 0.90, and 0.83 for the DL-based classifier. Most of ambiguity comes from non-COVID-19 pneumonia with manifestations that overlap with COVID-19, as well as mild COVID-19 cases. Non-COVID-19 classification performance is 91% for ILD, 64% for other pneumonias, and 94% for no pathologies, which demonstrates the robustness of our method against different compositions of control groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our new method accurately discriminates COVID-19 from other types of pneumonia, ILD, and CTs with no pathologies, using quantitative imaging features derived from chest CT, while balancing interpretability of results and classification performance and, therefore, may be useful to facilitate diagnosis of COVID-19. KEY POINTS: • Unsupervised clustering reveals the key tomographic features including percent airspace opacity and peripheral and basal opacities most typical of COVID-19 relative to control groups. • COVID-19-positive CTs were compared with COVID-19-negative chest CTs (including a balanced distribution of non-COVID-19 pneumonia, ILD, and no pathologies). Classification accuracies for COVID-19, pneumonia, ILD, and CT scans with no pathologies are respectively 90%, 64%, 91%, and 94%. • Our deep learning (DL)-based classification method demonstrates an AUC of 0.93 (sensitivity 90%, specificity 83%). Machine learning methods applied to quantitative chest CT metrics can therefore improve diagnostic accuracy in suspected COVID-19, particularly in resource-constrained environments.