Multiparametric mapping by cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging in cardiac tumors.
Benign
Cardiac magnetic resonance
Cardiac tumor
Mapping
Primary malignant
Journal
Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance
ISSN: 1532-429X
Titre abrégé: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9815616
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
22 Jun 2023
22 Jun 2023
Historique:
received:
15
12
2022
accepted:
11
05
2023
medline:
26
6
2023
pubmed:
23
6
2023
entrez:
22
6
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
There is a paucity of quantitative measurements of cardiac tumors and myocardium using parametric mapping techniques. This study aims to explore quantitative characteristics and diagnostic performance of native T1, T2, and extracellular volume (ECV) values of cardiac tumors and left ventricular (LV) myocardium. Patients with suspected cardiac tumors who underwent cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) between November 2013 and March 2021 were prospectively enrolled. The diagnoses of primary benign or malignant tumors were based on pathologic findings if available, comprehensive medical history evaluations, imaging, and long-term follow-up data. Patients with pseudo-tumors, cardiac metastasis, primary cardiac diseases, and prior radiotherapy or chemotherapy were excluded. Multiparametric mapping values were measured on both cardiac tumors and the LV myocardium. Statistical analyses were performed using independent-samples t-test, receiver operating characteristic, and Bland-Altman analyses. A total of 80 patients diagnosed with benign (n = 54), or primary malignant cardiac tumors (n = 26), and 50 age and sex-matched healthy volunteers were included. Intergroup differences in the T1 and T2 values of cardiac tumors were not significant, however, patients with primary malignant cardiac tumors showed significantly higher mean myocardial T1 values (1360 ± 61.4 ms) compared with patients with benign tumors (1259.7 ± 46.2 ms), and normal controls (1206 ± 44.0 ms, all P < 0.05) at 3 T. Patients with primary malignant cardiac tumors also showed significantly higher mean ECV (34.6 ± 5.2%) compared with patients with benign (30.0 ± 2.5%) tumors, and normal controls (27.3 ± 3.0%, all P < 0.05). For the differentiation between primary malignant and benign cardiac tumors, the mean myocardial native T1 value showed the highest efficacy (AUC: 0.919, cutoff value: 1300 ms) compared with mean ECV (AUC: 0.817) and T2 (AUC: 0.619) values. Native T1 and T2 of cardiac tumors showed high heterogeneity, while myocardial native T1 values in primary malignant cardiac tumors were elevated compared to patients with benign cardiac tumors, which may serve as a new imaging marker for primary malignant cardiac tumors.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
There is a paucity of quantitative measurements of cardiac tumors and myocardium using parametric mapping techniques. This study aims to explore quantitative characteristics and diagnostic performance of native T1, T2, and extracellular volume (ECV) values of cardiac tumors and left ventricular (LV) myocardium.
METHODS
METHODS
Patients with suspected cardiac tumors who underwent cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) between November 2013 and March 2021 were prospectively enrolled. The diagnoses of primary benign or malignant tumors were based on pathologic findings if available, comprehensive medical history evaluations, imaging, and long-term follow-up data. Patients with pseudo-tumors, cardiac metastasis, primary cardiac diseases, and prior radiotherapy or chemotherapy were excluded. Multiparametric mapping values were measured on both cardiac tumors and the LV myocardium. Statistical analyses were performed using independent-samples t-test, receiver operating characteristic, and Bland-Altman analyses.
RESULTS
RESULTS
A total of 80 patients diagnosed with benign (n = 54), or primary malignant cardiac tumors (n = 26), and 50 age and sex-matched healthy volunteers were included. Intergroup differences in the T1 and T2 values of cardiac tumors were not significant, however, patients with primary malignant cardiac tumors showed significantly higher mean myocardial T1 values (1360 ± 61.4 ms) compared with patients with benign tumors (1259.7 ± 46.2 ms), and normal controls (1206 ± 44.0 ms, all P < 0.05) at 3 T. Patients with primary malignant cardiac tumors also showed significantly higher mean ECV (34.6 ± 5.2%) compared with patients with benign (30.0 ± 2.5%) tumors, and normal controls (27.3 ± 3.0%, all P < 0.05). For the differentiation between primary malignant and benign cardiac tumors, the mean myocardial native T1 value showed the highest efficacy (AUC: 0.919, cutoff value: 1300 ms) compared with mean ECV (AUC: 0.817) and T2 (AUC: 0.619) values.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Native T1 and T2 of cardiac tumors showed high heterogeneity, while myocardial native T1 values in primary malignant cardiac tumors were elevated compared to patients with benign cardiac tumors, which may serve as a new imaging marker for primary malignant cardiac tumors.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37349765
doi: 10.1186/s12968-023-00938-9
pii: 10.1186/s12968-023-00938-9
pmc: PMC10286406
doi:
Substances chimiques
Contrast Media
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
37Subventions
Organisme : National Natural Science Foundation of China
ID : 81571638
Organisme : 1·3·5 project for disciplines of excellence-Clinical Research Incubation Project, West China Hospital
ID : ZYJC18013
Organisme : 1·3·5 project for disciplines of excellence-Clinical Research Incubation Project, West China Hospital
ID : ZYGD22013
Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
Circ J. 2022 Jan 25;86(2):335
pubmed: 34588405
Int J Cardiol. 2021 May 15;331:281-288
pubmed: 33582195
J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2020 Mar 12;22(1):19
pubmed: 32160925
Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2014 Mar 21;111(12):205-11
pubmed: 24717305
Jpn Circ J. 1975 May;39(5):531-42
pubmed: 1152184
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2020 May 12;75(18):2338-2347
pubmed: 32381166
Eur Radiol. 2012 Jan;22(1):73-82
pubmed: 21870041
J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2017 Mar 29;19(1):38
pubmed: 28351402
Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2019 May 1;20(5):501
pubmed: 30649243
Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2016 Jan;97:303-11
pubmed: 26467073
J Cardiovasc Med (Hagerstown). 2016 Jan;17(1):37-43
pubmed: 25022931
Eur Heart J. 2012 May;33(10):1268-78
pubmed: 22279111
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004 Apr 21;43(8):1412-9
pubmed: 15093876
J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2017 Oct 9;19(1):75
pubmed: 28992817
JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2018 Jun;11(6):926-928
pubmed: 29248663
Nat Rev Cardiol. 2017 Sep;14(9):536-549
pubmed: 28436488
Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2016 Jun;32(6):913-20
pubmed: 26838354
Front Physiol. 2018 Mar 06;9:140
pubmed: 29559916
Front Cardiovasc Med. 2020 Nov 19;7:602137
pubmed: 33330663
J Cardiothorac Surg. 2016 Jul 07;11(1):95
pubmed: 27387491
JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2013 Sep;6(9):955-62
pubmed: 23582361
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2007 Sep;26(3):452-9
pubmed: 17729358
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018 Jul 10;72(2):202-227
pubmed: 29976295
JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2014 Sep;7(9):896-905
pubmed: 25129516
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1994 Nov;108(5):862-70
pubmed: 7967668
Circulation. 2001 Jun 5;103(22):2687-93
pubmed: 11390338
Eur Heart J. 2021 Dec 28;43(1):71-80
pubmed: 34545397
Tex Heart Inst J. 2014 Dec 01;41(6):626-30
pubmed: 25593528
Nat Rev Cancer. 2016 Aug 23;16(9):582-98
pubmed: 27550820
J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2017 Oct 12;19(1):76
pubmed: 29025425
Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2020 May;36(5):971-981
pubmed: 32040684
Circulation. 2002 Jan 29;105(4):539-42
pubmed: 11815441
Annu Rev Pathol. 2017 Jan 24;12:153-186
pubmed: 27959632
J Nucl Med. 2012 Jun;53(6):856-63
pubmed: 22577239
JACC CardioOncol. 2020 Jun 16;2(2):293-311
pubmed: 34396236
Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1993 Oct;117(10):1027-31
pubmed: 8215825
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2019 May;157(5):1912-1922.e2
pubmed: 30551963
Virchows Arch. 2020 Oct;477(4):603-607
pubmed: 32372222
J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2021 Apr 5;23(1):42
pubmed: 33814005
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011 Aug 30;58(10):1044-54
pubmed: 21867841
Arq Bras Cardiol. 2018 Feb;110(2):203-204
pubmed: 29561997
Radiology. 2013 Jul;268(1):26-43
pubmed: 23793590