Aims Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging has long been a contraindication for patients with a cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED). Recent studies support the feasibility and safety for non-thoracic magnetic resonance imaging, but data for CMR are sparse. The aim of the current study was to determine the safety in patients with magnetic resonance (MR)-conditional or non-MR-conditional CIED and to develop a best practice approach. Methods and results All patients with a CIED undergoing CMR imaging (1.5 T) between April 2014 and April 2017 were included in the study. Devices were programmed according to the standardized protocol directly before and after the CMR examination. Follow-up interrogation was performed 6 months after CMR examination. Results were compared with a large, reference cohort of CIED patients not undergoing any MR examination. A total of 200 consecutive patients with a CIED (non-MR-conditional, n = 103) were included in the study. Directly after CMR imaging, one device failure (0.5%, battery status = end of service) was noted necessitating premature generator replacement. In three patients (2%) of pacemaker/implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) carriers a sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT) occurred during CMR imaging. Ten ICD showed a decrease in battery capacity immediately after CMR. Overall, the reference cohort showed comparable changes of CIED function during follow-up. Conclusion With adherence to a standardized protocol and established exclusion criteria CMR imaging could safely be performed in patients with a CIED. The potential risks of device malfunction necessitate the presence of a device trained individual during the entire CMR examination. If there is a history of VT storm the attendance of an experienced cardiologist, should be mandatory.

No abstract

Transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) and cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) are current standard for assessing aortic regurgitation (AR). Regurgitant fraction (RF) can also be estimated by Doppler examination of the left subclavian artery (LSA-Doppler). However, a comparison of AR grading scales using these methods and a TTE multiparametric approach as reference is lacking. We evaluated the severity of AR in 73 patients (58 ± 15 years; 57 men), with a wide spectrum of AR of the native valve. Using a recommended TTE multiparametric approach the AR was divided in none/trace (n = 12), mild (n = 23), moderate (n = 12), and severe (n = 26). RF was evaluated by LSA-Doppler (ratio between diastolic and systolic velocity-time integrals) and by CMR phase-contrast imaging (performed in the aorta 1 cm above the aortic valve); the grading scales were then calculated. There were a good correlation between all methods, but mean RF values were greater with TTE compared with LSA-Doppler and CMR (39 ± 16% vs. 35 ± 18% vs. 32 ± 20%, respectively; p < 0.037). Mean differences in RF values between methods were significant in the groups with mild and moderate AR. Grading scales that best defined the TTE derived AR severity using CMR were: mild, < 21%; moderate, 22 to 41%; and severe, > 42%; and using LSA-Doppler: mild, < 29%; moderate, 30 to 44%; and severe, > 45%. RF values for AR grading using TTE, LSA-Doppler and CMR correlate well but differ in groups with mild and moderate AR when using a recognized multiparametric echocardiographic approach. Clinical prospective studies should validate these proposed modality adjusted grading scales.

Background Cardiac autonomic dysfunction after myocardial infarction identifies patients at high risk despite only moderately reduced left ventricular ejection fraction. We aimed to show that telemedical monitoring with implantable cardiac monitors in these patients can improve early detection of subclinical but prognostically relevant arrhythmic events. MethodsWe did a prospective investigator-initiated, randomised, multicentre, open-label, diagnostic trial at 33 centres in Germany and Austria. Survivors of acute myocardial infarction with left ventricular ejection fraction of 36-50% had biosignal analysis for assessment of cardiac autonomic function. Patients with abnormal periodic repolarisation dynamics (≥5•75 deg²) or abnormal deceleration capacity (≤2•5 ms) were randomly assigned (1:1) to telemedical monitoring with implantable cardiac monitors or conventional follow-up. Primary endpoint was time to detection of serious arrhythmic events defined by atrial fibrillation 6 min or longer, atrioventricular block class IIb or higher and fast non-sustained (>187 beats per min; ≥40 beats) or sustained ventricular tachycardia or fibrillation. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02594488.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Three-dimensional transthoracic echocardiography (3D-TTE) provides a semi-automated proximal isovelocity surface area method (3D-PISA) to obtain quantitative parameters. Data assessing regurgitation severity in mitral valve prolapse (MVP) are scarce, so we assessed the 3D-PISA method compared with 2D-PISA and cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) and the role of an eccentricity index. We evaluated the 3D-PISA method for assessing MR in 54 patients with MVP (57 ± 14 years; 42 men; 12 mild/mild-moderate; 12 moderate-severe; and 30 severe MR). Role of an asymmetric (i.e. eccentricity index ≥ 1.25) flow convergence region (FCR) and inter-modality consistency were then assessed. 3D-PISA derived regurgitant volume (RVol) showed a good correlation with 2D-PISA and CMR derived parameters (r = 0.86 and r = 0.81, respectively). The small mean differences with 2D-PISA derived RVol did not reach statistical significance in overall population (5.7 ± 23 ml, 95% CI − 0.6 to 12; p = 0.08) but differed in those with asymmetric 3D-FCR (n = 21; 2D-PISA: 72 ± 36 ml vs. 3D-PISA: 93 ± 47 ml; p = 0.001). RVol mean values were higher using PISA methods (CMR 57 ± 33 ml; 2D-PISA 73 ± 39 ml; and 3D-PISA 79 ± 45 ml) and an overestimation was observed when CMR was used as reference (2D-PISA vs. CMR: mean difference: 15.8 ml [95% CI 10–22, p < 0.001]; and 3D-PISA vs. CMR: 21.5 ml [95% CI 14–29, p < 0.001]). Intra- and inter-observer reliability was excellent (ICC 0.91–0.99), but with numerically lower coefficient of variation for 3D-PISA (8%–10% vs. 2D-PISA: 12%–16%). 3D-PISA method for assessing regurgitation in MVP may enable analogous evaluation compared to standard 2D-PISA, but with overestimation in case of asymmetric FCR or when CMR is used as reference method.