Abstract
AimsMyocardial inflammation is increasingly detected non-invasively by tissue mapping with cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR). Intraindividual agreement with endomyocardial biopsy (EMB) or marker of myocardial injury, high-sensitive troponin (hs-cTnT) in patients with clinically suspected viral myocarditis not understood. Methods and resultsProspective multicentre study of consecutive patients with clinically suspected myocarditis who underwent blood testing for hs-cTnT, CMR and EMB as a part of diagnostic work-up. EMB was considered positive based on immunohistological criteria in line with the ESC definitions. CMR diagnoses employed tissue mapping using sequence-specific cut-off for native T1 and T2 mapping; active inflammation was defined as T1≥2SD and T2≥2SD above the mean of normal range. Hs-cTnT of greater than 13.9ng/1 was considered significant. A total of 114 patients (age (mean±SD) 54±16, 65% males) were included, of which 79(69%) had positive EMB-criteria, 64(56%) CMR criteria, and a total of 58 (51%) positive troponin. Agreement between EMB and CMR diagnostic criteria was poor (CMR vs. ESC: AUCs: 0.51 (0.39-0.62)). The agreement between the significant hs-cTnT rise and CMR-based diagnosis of myocarditis was good (AUC: 0.84 (0.68-0.92); p<0.001), but poor for EMB (0.50 (0.40-0.61). Hs-cTnT was significantly associated with native T1 and T2, hs-CRP and NT-pro BNP (r=0.37, r=0.35, r=0.30, r=0.25 p<0.001), but not immunohistochemical criteria or viral presence. ConclusionsIn clinically suspected viral myocarditis, all diagnostic approaches reflect the pathophysiological elements of myocardial inflammation, however the differing underlying drivers only partially overlap. The EMB and CMR diagnostic algorithms are neither interchangeable in terms of interpretation of myocardial inflammation nor in their relationship with myocardial injury.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call