Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging for left atrial appendage closure planning.

BACKGROUND: Transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) and cardiac computed tomography angiography (CCTA) are currently utilized for left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) planning. During the recent global iodine contrast media shortage in 2022, cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) was utilized for the first time for LAAC planning. This study sought to assess the utility of CMR versus TEE for LAAC planning. METHODS: This single center retrospective study consisted of all patients who underwent preoperative CMR for LAAC with Watchman FLX or Amplatzer Amulet. Key measures were accuracy of LAA thrombus exclusion, ostial diameter, depth, lobe count, morphology, accuracy of predicted device size, and devices deployed per case. Bland-Altman Analysis was used to compare CMR versus TEE measurements of LAA ostial diameter and depth. RESULTS: 25 patients underwent preoperative CMR for LAAC planning. A total of 24 (96%) cases were successfully completed with 1.2 ± 0.5 devices deployed per case. Among the 18 patients who underwent intraoperative TEE, there was no significant difference between CMR versus TEE in LAA thrombus exclusion (CMR 83% vs. TEE 100% cases, p = .229), lobe count (CMR 1.7 ± 0.8 vs. TEE 1.4 ± 0.6, p = .177), morphology (p = .422), and accuracy of predicted device size (CMR 67% vs. TEE 72% cases, p = 1.000). When comparing the difference between CMR and TEE measurements, Bland-Altman analysis demonstrated no significant difference in LAA ostial diameter (CMR-TEE bias 0.7 mm, 95% CI [-1.1, 2.4], p = .420), but LAA depth was significantly larger with CMR versus TEE (CMR-TEE bias 7.4 mm, 95% CI [1.6, 13.2], p = .015). CONCLUSIONS: CMR is a promising alternative for LAAC planning in cases where TEE or CCTA are contraindicated or unavailable.

The prognostic value of positron emission tomography in the evaluation of suspected cardiac sarcoidosis.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the prognostic value of positron emission tomography (PET) imaging in patients undergoing evaluation for known or suspected cardiac sarcoidosis (CS) while not on active immunotherapy. BACKGROUND: Previous studies have attempted to identify the value of PET imaging to aid in risk stratification of patients with CS, however, most cohorts have included patients currently on immunosuppression, which may confound scan results by suppressing positive findings. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 197 patients not on immunosuppression who underwent 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) PET scans for evaluation of known or suspected CS. The primary endpoint of the study was time to ventricular arrhythmia (VT/VF), or death. Candidate predictors were identified by univariable Cox proportional hazards regression. Independent predictors were identified by performing multivariable Cox regression with stepwise forward selection. RESULTS: Median follow-up time was 531 [IQR 309, 748] days. 41 patients met the primary endpoint. After stepwise forward selection, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.96-0.99, P = 0.02), history of VT/VF (HR 4.19, 95% CI 2.15-8.17, P < 0.001), and summed rest score (SRS) (HR 1.06, 95% CI 1.02-1.12, P = 0.01) were predictive of the primary endpoint. Quantitative and qualitative measures of FDG uptake on PET were not predictive of clinical events. CONCLUSIONS: Among untreated patients who underwent PET scans to evaluate known or suspected CS, LVEF, history of VT/VF, and SRS were associated with adverse clinical outcomes.

Characterization of a highly effective preparation for suppression of myocardial glucose utilization.

BACKGROUND: With appropriate protocols, F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) can visualize myocardial inflammation. Optimal protocols and normative myocardial FDG uptake values are not well-established. METHODS: We evaluated 111 patients referred for inflammation cardiac FDG PET/CT. Patients followed a low-carbohydrate, high-fat diet for 36 hours before imaging and received unfractionated heparin. Glucose and fatty acid metabolism biomarkers were obtained. Mean blood pool and maximum myocardial uptake (SUVmean, SUVmax) were measured, avoiding areas of abnormal FDG uptake or spillover. RESULTS: Adequate suppression of myocardial FDG uptake occurred in 95% of patients (n = 106). Myocardial SUVmax was significantly below background blood pool SUVmean: septal myocardial to blood pool ratio 0.75 (95% CI 0.73-0.77; P < 0.001); lateral myocardial to blood pool ratio 0.70 (95% CI 0.68-0.72; P < 0.001). Glucose, insulin, and C-peptide correlated to blood pool SUVmean (Spearman rs = 0.39, P < 0.01; rs = 0.40, P < 0.01; rs = 0.35, P < 0.01) and myocardial SUVmax (Spearman rs = 0.31, P < 0.01; rs = 0.31, P < 0.01; rs = 0.26, P < 0.01). Fatty acid metabolism biomarkers did not correlate to myocardial SUVmax. CONCLUSIONS: Patients following intensive metabolic preparation have myocardial FDG SUVmax below background SUVmean. Biomarkers of glucose metabolism modestly correlate to FDG uptake.