Abstract

BackgroundCardiac catheterization and cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging have distinct diagnostic roles in the congenital heart disease (CHD) population. Invasive CMR (iCMR) allows for a more thorough assessment of cardiac hemodynamics at the same time under the same conditions. It is assumed but not proven that iCMR gives an incremental value by providing more accurate flow quantification.MethodsSubjects with CHD underwent real-time 1.5 T iCMR using a passive catheter tracking technique with partial saturation pulse of 40° to visualize the gadolinium-filled balloon, CMR-conditional guidewire, and cardiac structures simultaneously to aid in completion of right (RHC) and left heart catheterization (LHC). Repeat iCMR and catheterization measurements were performed to compare reliability by the Pearson (PCC) and concordance correlation coefficients (CCC).ResultsThirty CHD (20 single ventricle and 10 bi-ventricular) subjects with a median age and weight of 8.3 years (2–33) and 27.7 kg (9.2–80), respectively, successfully underwent iCMR RHC and LHC. No catheter related complications were encountered. Time taken for first pass RHC and LHC/aortic pull back was 5.1, and 2.9 min, respectively. Total success rate to obtain required data points to complete Fick principle calculations for all patients was 321/328 (98%). One patient with multiple shunts was an outlier and excluded from further analysis. The PCC for catheter-derived pulmonary blood flow (Qp) (0.89, p < 0.001) is slightly lower than iCMR-derived Qp (0.96, p < 0.001), whereas catheter-derived systemic blood flow (Qs) (0.62, p = < 0.001) was considerably lower than iCMR-derived Qs (0.94, p < 0.001). CCC agreement for Qp at baseline (C1-CCC = 0.65, 95% CI 0.41–0.81) and retested conditions (C2-CCC = 0.78, 95% CI 0.58–0.89) were better than for Qs at baseline (C1-CCC = 0.22, 95% CI − 0.15–0.53) and retested conditions (C2-CCC = 0.52, 95% CI 0.17–0.76).ConclusionThis study further validates hemodynamic measurements obtained via iCMR. iCMR-derived flows have considerably higher test–retest reliability for Qs. iCMR evaluations allow for more reproducible hemodynamic assessments in the CHD population.

Highlights

  • Cardiac catheterization and cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging have distinct diagnostic roles in the congenital heart disease (CHD) population

  • A recently developed novel passive catheter tracking technique using a real-time single-shot balanced steady-state free precession with flip angle (FA) 35°, echo time (TE) 1.3 ms, repetition time (TR) 2.7 ms, and a nonselective partial saturation pre-pulse [3, 6] was used to visualize the gadolinium-filled balloon, MR-conditional guidewire, and cardiac structures simultaneously to aid in completion of right heart catheterization (RHC) and left heart catheterization (LHC)/aortic pull back under real-time Invasive CMR (iCMR) visualization [3]

  • Patient demographics Thirty CHD (21 male) subjects participated in the iCMR reproducibility study at our institution (Fig. 3)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Cardiac catheterization and cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging have distinct diagnostic roles in the congenital heart disease (CHD) population. Invasive CMR (iCMR) allows for a more thorough assessment of cardiac hemodynamics at the same time under the same conditions. Non-invasive cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) and invasive cardiac catheterization have distinct diagnostic roles in the congenital heart disease (CHD). CMR contributes important volume and flow data while cardiac catheterization allows for direct pressure and saturation measurements. By linking these powerful modalities, invasive CMR (iCMR) allows for a more accurate and thorough assessment of cardiac hemodynamics at the same time under the same conditions. Accurate pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) and systemic blood flow measurements are critical for clinical decision making. PVR and systemic vascular resistance (SVR) can be determined by obtaining pressure measurements across the pulmonary bed (transpulmonary pressure gradient (TPG)) and systemic circulation (transsystemic pressure gradient (TSG))

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

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